From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bees v. Gilronan

Supreme Court of Ohio
Mar 25, 1953
111 N.E.2d 395 (Ohio 1953)

Summary

noting that wherever a candidate's name appeared on the ballot, each voter could indicate his or her free choice

Summary of this case from Sonneman v. State

Opinion

No. 33429

Decided March 25, 1953.

Elections — Contest proceeding — Appeal to Supreme Court — Leave of court a prerequisite.

APPEAL from the Court of Common Pleas of Mahoning County.

This proceeding to contest an election, originating in the Court of Common Pleas, resulted in a judgment in favor of the contestees. From that judgment the contester appeals directly to this court on questions of law.

The cause is before the court on motion of contestees to dismiss the appeal.

Mr. Herschel Kriger and Mr. Solomon Malkoff, for appellant.

Messrs. Osborne Osborne, Mr. William A. Mason and Mr. Patrick J. Mellilo, for appellees.


Since leave to appeal has not been granted, the appeal is dismissed on authority of Young v. Fiedler, ante, 184, this day decided.

Appeal dismissed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., MIDDLETON, MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN and STEWART, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bees v. Gilronan

Supreme Court of Ohio
Mar 25, 1953
111 N.E.2d 395 (Ohio 1953)

noting that wherever a candidate's name appeared on the ballot, each voter could indicate his or her free choice

Summary of this case from Sonneman v. State
Case details for

Bees v. Gilronan

Case Details

Full title:BEES, APPELLANT v. GILRONAN ET AL., APPELLEES

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Mar 25, 1953

Citations

111 N.E.2d 395 (Ohio 1953)
111 N.E.2d 395

Citing Cases

Modarelli v. Carney

2. An appeal of an election contest, filed pursuant to R.C. 3515.15, will be dismissed by the Supreme Court…

Tsongas v. Secretary of the Commonwealth

If we assume, without deciding, that the Massachusetts Constitution requires the rotation of primary ballots,…