BREAKING NEWS! BECK (SWANSON/DARROW ATTORNEY) FILES NEW REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED SUPREME COURT DECISION

WILL

OHIO'S

"COURT OF LAST RESORT"

WEIGH-IN BY

WEDNESDAY? 

UPDATED:  2:24 PM

Minutes ago the SCPR received a media notice from the Ohio Supreme Court indicated that Greg Beck, attorney for Tim Swanson and Lou Darrow, renewing their request made when the initial pleading in mandamus that the high court expedite its consideration of the Swanson/Darrow motion for an order eliminating George T. Maier from the field of candidates for Stark County.

As things stand now, Chairman Randy Gonzalez (Stark County Democratic Party and an avowed Maier supporter) plans to have the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee considered Maier, Douglas Smith, Larry Dordea (a Republican) and Lou Darrow for appointment in a SCDP-CC meeting scheduled for Wdnesday evening.

The committee acted illegally (according the the Supreme Court (November 6, 2013) in Swanson quo warranto action filed on February 12, 2013) when it appointed Maier on February 5, 2013 to replace sheriff-elect Mike McDonald (November, 2012) who resigned (due to illness) his status prior to January 7, 2013, the date on which he was to have taken office.

What follows are actual excerpts from Beck pleading (except, of course the SCPR [ ... ] editorial insertions:

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO EXPEDITE WRIT

1. INTRODUCTION.

Time is of the essence in connection with this mandamus action. As indicated above, a meeting of the respondent DCC is scheduled for December 11, 2013, and the respondents should be compelled to carry out at that meeting their duty to appoint a person to serve as Stark Count-y Sheriff from the two eligible people qualified to fill the vacancy created on January 7, 2013.

[SCPR NOTE: BECK OUTLINES SWANSON/DARROW POSITION]

Relators maintain that the only vacancy which remains to be filled by appointment is that created when officer-elect, Michael A. McDonald, announced that he was unable to assume office in January of 2013. The vacancy occurred January 7, 2013 and the applicable qualification date for appointment to that vacancy was February 6,2013. "Here, McDonald indicated before the beginning of his term that he was unable to assume office, so the vacancy occurred on January 7, the first day of McDonald's term. And 30 days after that date is the 'qualification date' February 6, 2013." Swanson v. Maier, atT128.

Importantly, it is undisputed in this case that two individuals, relator Lou Darrow and Larry Dordea, qualified for the appointment to the McDonald vacancy, and they did so prior to the February 6, 2013 qualification date.

[SCPR NOTE: BECK OUTLINES GONZALEZ/STARK DEMS POSITION]

In stark contrast, the respondents' position in this case can be drawn from the brief they file on December 2, 2013. Therein, the respondents claim that there was a"vacancy caused by the removal of Maier" which resulted from the judicial ouster of Maier by this Court. (Respondents' Brief, p. 12). Based upon that faulty premise, the respondents then fiirther contend that this "new vacancy" allowed for an. "updated 30 day qualification date" extending from the Court's decision in Maier.

[COMPELLING REASONS:   PRE-MEETING SUPREME CT ACTION]

Because the only vacancy which rein.ains to be filled by appointment under R.C. 305.02(B), for the term of officer-elect McDonald, is the McDonald vacancy, the Court should expedite consideration of this case and grant the mandamus relief requested by the relators. Such expedited consideration is warranted to avoid further protracted litigation and uncertainty over who is lawfully qualified to serve as the next Stark C'ounty Sheriff, to take office for the McDonald term. This case is of substantial public importance and immediacy.

There is no legal authority for the proposition advanced by respondents that a "new vacancy" in the office at issue was "created" by this Court's judicial ouster of George T. Maier.

There is no legal authority for the proposition advanced by respondents that a "new vacancy" in the office at issue was "created" by this Court's judicial ouster of George T. Maier.  The respondents have a clear legal duty to carry out the operative statutory appointment authority in strict compliance with Ohio law, and mandamus is the proper remedy to compel the respondents accordingly. It is only the McDonald vacancy and term that remain to be filled by appointment.

IV. CONCLUSION.

Recognition of the single vacancy at issue, the McDonald vacancy, and preservation of the applicable qualification date of February 6, 2013 for that vacancy, provide the only mechanism for protecting the appointment process from manipulation. This  Court should reject any approach under which an unqualified candidate for the office of sheriff can receive an appointment, usurping the appointment opportunity of qualified applicants and then effectively create time to manufacture new credentials if ousted by a challenger. Such an approach to utilization of the statutes would lead to manipulation.

There was no "new vacancy" created by the judicial ouster of Maier. Maier was not legally qualified for the appointment, and he should never have even been in the office. Relator Swanson was entitled to the office, as Acting Sheriff, the entire time since his appointment in January of 2013 under R.C. 305.02(F). The "exception"clause of R.C. 305.02(B) makes its clear that there is but one vacancy to be filled in this instance, that of officer-elect McDonald, and the person lawfully appointed will assume the McDonald vacancy at the beginning of the term.

The respondent DCC is set to meet on December 11, 2013, and at that time will consider applicants for appointment to the McDonald vacancy who applied after this Court's decision in Swanson v. Maier who possess credentials or qualifications created after this Court's decision. This process should not be permitted, because it runs contrary to the Revised Code appointment procedures and utterly ignores the vacancy date of January 7, 2013 and applicable qualification date of February 6, 2013.