AUG 2 ^, Io;?7 CLERK of COURT SUPREME COUR? of OHIO TABLE of CONTENTS Paae
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NO. 07-1509 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO ORIGINAL ACTION IN MANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION FOR ELECTION-RELATED MATTER STATE OF OHIO EX REL. DEBORAH S. REESE Relator, V. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, et al. Respondents. MEMORANDUM OF RELATOR IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT IN MANDAMUS AND/OR PROHIBITION/ RESPONSE TO RESPONDENTS' MOTION TO DISMISS/MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS DANIEL P. CARTER (0074848) Counsel of Record carter@buck l eylcing. com JEFFREY W. RUPLE (00687420 [email protected] BUCKLEY KING LPA 1400 Fifth Third Center 600 Superior Avenue, East Cleveland, OH 44114-2652 (216) 363-1400 (216) 579-1020 (facsimile) Attorncy for Relator Deborali S. Reese ^'.1 ^;^ L ^ D AUG 2 ^, Io;?7 CLERK OF COURT SUPREME COUR? OF OHIO TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................2 II. FACTS ..................................................................................................................4 III. LAW AND ARGiJMENT ....................................................................................7 A. A WRITE OF MANDAMUS AND/OR PROHIBITION IS RELATOR'S ONLY REMEDY BECAUSE THE GENERAL ELECTION IS LESS THAN NINETY (90) DAYS AWAY ...................7 B. JUDGE GRAVENS MUST BE CONSIDERED AN INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE . ............................................................. 9 C. BECAUSE JUDGE GRAVENS MUST BE CONSIDERED AN INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE BY VIRTUE OF THE TYPE OF ELECTION HELD, SHE MUST BE STRICKEN FROM THE GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT ..................................... 12 IV. RESPONDENTS' MOTION TO DISMISS SHOULD BE DFNIED .................. 14 V. NOTICE OF SIMILAR CASE .............................................................................17 VI. CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................17 Table of Authorities Page Statutes Ohio Rev. CodeAnn. §1901.07 ...............................................................................4, 11, 12, 17, 18 Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3501.39(A) .................................................................................................2 Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3501.01(J) ...........................................................................................12, 18 Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3505.04 .....................................................................................................19 Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3505.05 .....................................................................................................12 Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3513.257 .........................................................................................9, 14, 17 Ohio Rev. Code Ann §3516.261 ................................................................................................5, 17 S. Ct. R. X, §4(B) .................................................................................................................3, 15, 16 S. Ct. R X, Section 9 ........................................................................................................................3 1. In re Election Contest of Democratic Primary Election Held May 4, 1999 for Nomination to the Office of'Clerk, Youngstown Mun. Ct. (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 258 ......12 2. Morrison v. Collcy (6°i Cir. 2006), 467 F.3d 503 ................................................2, 7, 13, 14 3. State ex rel. Beck v. Cascy ( 1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 79 ........................................................15 4. Stcrte ex rel. Brown v. Butler Cty. Bd ofElections (2006), 109 Ohio St.3d 63 ...................8 5. State ex rel. Choices• for Southwestern City Schools v. Anthony (2005), 108 Ohio St.3d 1 ... ...........................................................................................................7, 8 6. ,State ex rel. City ofToledo v. Lucas Cty. Bd ofElec•tions (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 73 ....... 14 7. State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd of Elections (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 302 ............................................ :................................................................... 7 8. State ex rel. Donnegan v. Cuyahoga Cly. Bd. Elections (2000), 136 Ohio App.3d 589 ... 10 9. State ex rel. Essig v. Blackwell (2004), 103 Oliio St.3d 481 .............................................17 10. Stale ex rel. Green v. Casey ( 1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 83 ......................................................15 11. State cx rel. Hackworth v. fiughes (2002), 97 Ohio St.3d 110 ......................................3, 14 12. State ex rel. Hoivard v. Skow (2004), 102 Ohio St.3d 423 ................................................17 13. State ex rel. Jennifer Martinez, et al. v. The Cuyahoga Cly. Bd. Elections (March 27, 2006), Cuyahoga App. No 87880 ......................................................................................10 14. State ex rel. Smart v. McKinley ( 1980), 64 Ohio St.2d 5, 6 .................................................9 15. State ex rel. Steele v. Morris•sey (2004), 103 Ohio St.3d 355 ..............................................8 16. State ex rel. Yiamouyiamzis v. Taft ( 1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 205 ..........................................15 17. Tatman v. Fair. field Cty. Bd. of Elec•tions (2004), 102 Ohio St.3d 425 ...........................8, 9 18. United States v. Gjieli {6"' Cir. 1983), 717 F.2d 968 .........................................................13 Ohio Secretary of State Advisory Opinion 2007-05 ..............................................................2, 7, 14 I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Rev. Code §3501.39(A), Relator Deborah S. Reese ("Relator") submitted and filed two written protest letters with the Respondents Cuyahoga County Board of' Elections and individual board members ("Respondents"). These protests challenged Judge Gravens' candidacy as invalid and in violation of the requirements established by the Sixth Circuit's decision in Morrison v. Colley (6"' Cir. 2006), 467 F.3d 503 (Ex. A) and Ohio Secretary of State Advisory Opinion No. 2007-05 ("SOS Opinion") (Ex. B). Relator requests this Court to issue a writ of mandannis and/or in the alternative a writ of prohibition to prevent Judge Maureen Adler Gravens ("Judge Gravens") from appearing on the 2007 General Election Ballot for the position of Rocky River Municipal Court Judge. The basis for the writ arises from the actions of Respondents acting contrary to the SOS Opinion. The SOS Opinion requires independent candidates not to vote in a subsequent party primary after filing an independent petition with the Respondents. Judge Gravens voted in the May 8, 2007 Deinocrat Primary, after filing as an independent candidate with the Respondents on May 2, 2007. This is sufficient for Judge Gravens to be removed from the General Election Ballot in accordance with the SOS Opinion and the Morrison case. (Exs. A and B) Contrary to this Court's prior admonitions that motions for judgment on the pleadings are improper in an expedited election case, Respondents filed a pleading styled "Respondent's Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings." Stcrle ex 2 rel. Hackworth v. Hughes (2002), 97 Ohio St.3d 110.1 Nevertheless, even if Respondent's Motions are entertained by this Court, they must be denied-z Regarding Respondents' Motion to Dismiss, Relator, in compliance with S. Ct. R. X, Section 4(B) provided not only her own affidavit made on her personal knowledge, but the affidavit of her counsel in support of the facts of her writ of mandamus and/or writ of prohibition made on personal laiowledge. Her affidavit specifically sets forth the facts which led to lrer original protests and eventually the present writ and Relator's testimony before Respondents demonstrates how she gained her personal knowledge. Respondents' Motion for Judgtnent on the Pleadings must fail as the undisputed facts demonstrate that a primary election was scheduled by Respondents for the position of Rocky River Municipal Court. Judge Gravens submitted petitions which could be either petitions for an independent candidate or a nonpartisan candidate depending on the type of election (the forms used are identical). However, since this was a partisan election, Judge Gravens only could be considered an independent. By virtue of Judge Gravens' subsequent voting in the Democrat primary for the position of Rocky River Municipal Court Clerk, she niust be removed from the ballot. 'Therefore, Relator requests her request for writ(s) be granted, requiring Respondents to decertify Judge Gravens as a candidate and/or prohibit her fi-otn appearing on the 2007 General Election Ballot as well as removing the filing status I It is also patently unfair to provide Respondents an opportunity to file botli a Merit Brief (Motion for Judgnient on the Pleadings) and essentially a Reply Brief (Response Brief). As Respondents have already filed a"merit" brief, Relator requests the Court deny Respondents the opportunity to file an additional brief. z Further, it is noteworthy that Respondents did not serve its Motions throtigh either personal seivice or facsimile in clear violation of Sup. Ct. R. X, Section 9, it was sent by first class inail. 3 designation as nonpartisan. Further, Relator requests the Court deny Respondents' improper procedural motions. 11. FACTS Relator hereby incorporates her Affidavit filed with the Writ of Mandamus/Writ of Prohibition and Affidavit of Counsel also filed with the Writ. After many years as a nonpartisan election for the Judge of the Rocky River Municipal Court,