Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1929

State ex rel. Automatic Registering Machine Co. v. Green

State ex rel. Automatic Registering Machine Co. v. Green
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided June 19, 1929 · Allen, Day, Jones, Kinkade, Marshall, Matthias, Proposition, Robinson, Syllabus
7 Ohio Law. Abs. 381

State ex rel. Automatic Registering Machine Co. v. Green

Opinion of the Court

Syllabus by

ALLEN, J.

ELECTIONS

(240 V2) A constitutional requirement that all elections be by ballot does not invalidate an otherwise legal enactment providing for the use of voting machines in elections. The term “ballot” designates a method of conducting elections which will insure secrecy, as distinguished., from open or viva-voce voting. (State, ex rel. Karlinger, v. Board of Deputy State Supervisors of Elections, 80 Ohio St., 471, overruled).

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

(360 C2) A charter city is not authorized, under Section 3 of Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution to prescribe a method of conducting state and county elections.

Marshall, CJ, Kinkade, Matthias and Day, JJ, concur. Robinson and Jones, JJ, concur in proposition 2 of the syllabus and in .the judgment.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑