Ohio high court declines to punish lawyers for filing claim against 2004 election

[JURIST] The Ohio Supreme Court [official website] ruled Thursday that the four lawyers who filed a claim citing widespread fraud in the 2004 presidential election should not be punished. Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro [official website] had attempted to file a suit against the lawyers, stating that they filed a "meritless claim" against the state's 2004 voting procedures [OAG press release], which essentially won the national election for George W. Bush. The lawyers represented 37 voters [JURIST report] who allegedly had evidence to prove the widespread fraudulence of the election, although these claims were later withdrawn. The court allows election-related complaints to be decided by a single justice, and Chief Justice Thomas Moyer [official profile] wrote the opinion [PDF text], where he stated that "The General Assembly could have expressly authorized courts to sanction those who pursue frivolous election contests. It has not." AP has more.

 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.