State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown

157 Ohio St. (N.S.) 317

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 2, 1952

DocketNo. 32985

StatusPublished

This text of 157 Ohio St. (N.S.) 317 (State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Wetecamp v. Brown, 157 Ohio St. (N.S.) 317 (Ohio 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The relator, Albert H. Wetecamp, has invoked the original jurisdiction of this court to obtain a writ of mandamus to require respondent, the Secretary of State, to appoint relator as a member of the Montgomery County Board of Elections. The petition alleges that the county executive committee recommended relator to be a member of the county board of elections, that the recommendation was forwarded to respondent, and that respondent has refused to make such appointment.

Respondent filed a demurrer to the petition on the [318]*318ground of defect of parties, in that relator has no authority to maintain the action.

Section 4785-9, General Code, provides that the county executive committee may file with the Secretary of State a recommendation for appointment to the county board of elections and that the Secretary of State shall appoint such recommended person unless he has reason to believe such person would not be a competent member, in which ease “he shall so state in writing to the chairman of such county executive committee, with the reasons therefor, and such committee may either recommend another elector, or may apply for a writ of mandamus to the Supreme Court of Ohio to compel the Secretary of State to appoint the elector so recommended; and in such action the burden of proof to show the qualifications of the person so recommended shall be on the committee.” (Emphasis supplied.)

The provision that the action shall be by the committee has not been complied with. The committee may avail itself of the alternative provisions of the statute above quoted.

The issue of capacity of parties relator was not presented or decided in State, ex rel. O’Neil, v. Griffith, Secy, of State, 136 Ohio St., 526, 27 N. E. (2d), 142, cited by relator herein.

The demurrer to the petition is sustained.

Demurrer sustained.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Middleton, Taft, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The relator, Albert H. Wetecamp, has invoked the original jurisdiction of this court to obtain a writ of mandamus to require respondent, the Secretary of State, to appoint relator as a member of the Montgomery County Board of Elections. The petition alleges that the county executive committee recommended relator to be a member of the county board of elections, that the recommendation was forwarded to respondent, and that respondent has refused to make such appointment.

Respondent filed a demurrer to the petition on the [318]*318ground of defect of parties, in that relator has no authority to maintain the action.

Section 4785-9, General Code, provides that the county executive committee may file with the Secretary of State a recommendation for appointment to the county board of elections and that the Secretary of State shall appoint such recommended person unless he has reason to believe such person would not be a competent member, in which ease “he shall so state in writing to the chairman of such county executive committee, with the reasons therefor, and such committee may either recommend another elector, or may apply for a writ of mandamus to the Supreme Court of Ohio to compel the Secretary of State to appoint the elector so recommended; and in such action the burden of proof to show the qualifications of the person so recommended shall be on the committee.” (Emphasis supplied.)

The provision that the action shall be by the committee has not been complied with. The committee may avail itself of the alternative provisions of the statute above quoted.

The issue of capacity of parties relator was not presented or decided in State, ex rel. O’Neil, v. Griffith, Secy, of State, 136 Ohio St., 526, 27 N. E. (2d), 142, cited by relator herein.

The demurrer to the petition is sustained.

Demurrer sustained.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Middleton, Taft, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 Ohio St. (N.S.) 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-wetecamp-v-brown-ohio-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack