State ex rel. Knowlton v. Noble Cty. Bd. of Elections

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Knowlton v. Noble Cty. Bd. of Elections

933 N.E.2d 268, 126 Ohio St. 3d 1559

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided September 9, 2010·No. 2010-1512·Published

Opinion

In Mandamus and Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus and prohibition involving an expedited election matter. Upon consideration of the motion for leave to intervene of Steven S. Hannum,

It is ordered by the court that the motion is granted, and Hannum’s evidence and brief are due on the same date as respondents’ evidence and brief.

[1560] Pfeifer, Acting C.J. Brown, C. J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In Mandamus and Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus and prohibition involving an expedited election matter. Upon consideration of the motion for leave to intervene of Steven S. Hannum,

It is ordered by the court that the motion is granted, and Hannum’s evidence and brief are due on the same date as respondents’ evidence and brief.

[1560] Pfeifer, Acting C.J. Brown, C. J., not participating.

State ex rel. Knowlton v. Noble Cty. Bd. of Elections, 933 N.E.2d 268, 126 Ohio St. 3d 1559 (Ohio 2010).

Pincite

933 N.E.2d 268 (State ex rel. Knowlton v. Noble Cty. Bd. of Elections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.