The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Frederick Kinsey, one of the parties in State ex rel. Walgate v. Kasich, has standing to challenge the constitutionality of a 2009 voter-approved amendment to the Ohio Constitution that permits limited casino and “racino” gambling operations. In order to have standing, the Court requires a plaintiff to show that […]
Ohio Supreme Court: Standing to Challenge Gambling Amendment Read Post »
In State ex rel. Ullmann v. Husted, 2015-Ohio-3120, the Franklin County Court of Appeals held that an individual suing for mandamus relief from the JobsOhio statute did not have standing under the public rights doctrine. The relator asked the court to not only declare the law creating JobsOhio unconstitutional, but also to direct state officeholders
Tenth District Holds No Standing in Second Attempt to Challenge JobsOhio Read Post »
In light of the recent Ohio Supreme Court case, ProgressOhio.org, Inc. v. JobsOhio, 2014 Ohio 2382, which held that liberal group ProgressOhio lacked standing to challenge JobsOhio legislation, the Ohio House proposed legislation to grant standing to challenge the constitutionality of an Ohio statute. House Bill 590 “wouldn’t allow the JobsOhio ruling to be reversed.
Bill Would Create Standing to Challenge Constitutionality of Ohio Statutes Read Post »
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court finding that liberal group ProgressOhio lacked standing to challenge JobsOhio legislation. ProgressOhio.org, Inc. v. JobsOhio, 2014 Ohio 2382, The court interpreted Ohio Constitution Article IV, Section 4(B) which concerns the jurisdiction of the common pleas court. The court further found that the provisions of the
The Ohio Supreme Court head oral arguments today in ProgressOhio v. JobsOhio, the case which will determine whether liberal group ProgressOhio has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the JobsOhio Act. Argument Video. Oral Argument Preview. See our prior post
Oral Arguments Heard in ProgressOhio v. JobsOhio Read Post »
The Ohio Court of Appeals, 10th District, affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Ohio Roundtable and a group of Ohio citizens that challenged the constitutionality of video lottery terminals at racinos. The dismissal was based on lack of standing. State ex rel. Walgate , 2013 Ohio 946 (Mar. 14, 2013) Article from
Appellate Court Rules Ohio Roundtable Lacks Standing to Challenge VLTs Read Post »
A divided Ohio Supreme Court agreed to hear proposition of law number 3, the standing issue, in ProgressOhio.org, Inc. v. JobsOhio, 2012-1272. Docket. Here is a Plain Dealer article on the decision. There is an interesting pro-standing amicus brief by the conservative group, the 1851 Center. Besides the standing issue, appellant’s other propositions of law
Supreme Court will Hear Standing Issue in JobsOhio Case Read Post »
Franklin County Common Pleas Court held that liberal group ProgressOhio lacked standing to pursue a constitutional challenge to the JobsOhio Act, specifically R.C. 187.01 et seq. and R.C. 4313.01 et seq., 129 General Assembly Am.Sub.H.B. No. 1 and amended by 129th G.A. Am.Sub.H.B. No. 153. ProgressOhio.org, Inc. v. JobsOhio , 2012-Ohio-2655. Columbus Dispatch Article.
Franklin County Court judge dismissed lawsuit filed by citizens that challenged the constitutionality of video lottery terminals at cacinos. The dismissal was based on lack of standing. See Plain Dealer Article and dismissal order in State ex rel. Walgate, Franklin County Case No. 11-CVH- 10 13126.
No Standing for Constitutional Challenge to Video Lottery Terminals at Racinos Read Post »