Ohio Supreme Court, 1976

State ex rel. Macko v. Monzula

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided October 27, 1976 · Brown, Celebrezze, Corrigan, Herbert, Neill, Stern

48 Ohio St. 2d 35; 356 N.E.2d 493; 2 Ohio Op. 3d 129; 1976 Ohio LEXIS 707

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

State Ex Rel. Murray v. Scioto County Board of Elections (Ohio 2010)
State ex rel. Van de Kerkhoff v. Dowling (Ohio 1991)
MacKo v. Byron (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1983)
MacKo v. Byron (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1982)
MacKo v. Bryon (6th Cir. 1981)
Macko v. Bryon (6th Cir. 1981)
State Ex Rel. Cody v. Stahl, Unpublished Decision (11-20-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

E. C. 3501.38(E) prescribes the form for the affidavit of a circulator on petitions presented to a public officer for the purpose of holding an election on any issue. The statute requires that the circulator must state that he witnessed the affixing of every signature, that all signers were to the best of his knowledge and belief qualified to sign, and that every signature is to the best of his knowledge and belief the signature of the person whose signature it purports to be.

*36The affidavits of the circulators on the petitions -filed September 2, 1976, fail to state that to the best of circu-lator’s knowledge and belief all signers were qualified to sign.

. This court has consistently demanded that the requirements for circulator’s affidavits be strictly complied with. See State, ex rel. Barton, v. Bd. of Elections (1975), 44 Ohio St. 2d 33.

Accordingly, respondents’ motion for summary judgment is allowed.

Cause dismissed.

O’Neill, C. J., Corrigan, Stern, Celebrezze, W. Brown, and P. Brown, JJ., concur. Herbert, J., concurs in the judgment.

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