Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

ALEXANDER ET AL., APPELLANTS v. CITY OF TOLEDO, APPELLEE.

Elections — Submission of issue of annexation of territory — What ballot to contain — Coercive words in caption not authorized — Such words invalidate election, when.

Per Curiam.

The question, the answer to which is determinative of this case, is whether the words, "for municipal purposes only, but not for school purposes," appearing in the caption of the ballot were unauthorized and thus invalidated the election. This court is of the opinion that the quoted words were unauthorized in the light of Section 3505.06, Revised Code, and that their use in the ballot invalidated the election.

The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas is reversed on authority of Beck v. City of Cincinnati, 162 Ohio St. 473, 124 N.E.2d 120.

Judgment reversed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, TAFT, MATTHIAS, BELL and HERBERT, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ALEXANDER v. TOLEDO
(Feb 11, 1959)