UPDATE: 7:08 PM
Today’s decision by Ohio Supreme Court
From: Steve Okey
I must respectfully disagree with any suggestion that the Ohio Supreme Court has dismissed the mandamus action "as being a 'moot' issue."
The Supreme Court certainly has the authority to dismiss a case as moot, as the Court has long recognized that it has no duty to answer moot questions. But the Court did not do so here. Rather, the Court granted our motion to dismiss. There were two main grounds in our motion to dismiss, but no part of our motion argued that the case would become moot. In fact, the word "moot" never appears in our motion. Based upon the Court's ruling, the only sound conclusion is that the Court found persuasive one or more of the arguments in our motion to dismiss.
UPDATE: 05:00 PM
When the SCPR was in Canton today for the weekly "regular" commissioners meeting, The Report learned that when the Supreme Court notified media that it had dismissed the Darrow/Swanson mandamus it isreported that cheering and somersaults (just to be funny) broke out at a downtown restaurants on the part George T. Maier supporters.
Matt Rink of The Repository reported earlier this afternoon (CantonRep.com) a George Maier comment, to wit: "As far as I am concerned it's over but you're asking the wrong person."
The SCPR can certainly agree with the latter part of his comment: "you'r asking the wrong person."
Just like he was apparently the wrong person to ask (asked by a Independent reporter) back in January, 2013:
On November 6th, the Ohio Supreme Court told Mr.Maier (Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto) that he was not qualified and tossed him from office on that day.
This statement was made two days before Maier received a legal opinion letter from his Roetzel & Andress (Columbus) based attorney Thomas Rosenberg on January 14th expressing the "opinion" that Maier was qualified under ORC 311.01 to be sheriff.
And, of course, we all now know (from the Ohio Supreme Court decision) that Rosenberg was wrong.
Talk about Maier engaging in activity of fooling oneself, today's statement and his January 12th statement are classic examples of such.
All the SCPR has to say to Maier and his supporters is: Dream on folks!
UPDATE: 11:45 AM
No surprise to the Stark County Political Report.
When the Supreme Court failed to respond to the Darrow/Swanson mandamus filed prior to the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee's December 11, 2013 meeting to redo the appointment of successor to November, 2012 Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald, most legal observers thought that the action would be dismissed as being what lawyers and courts refer to as being a "moot" issue.
The SCPR checked with Greg Beck on Monday (confirmed again today) on the status of Swanson's expected filing of a second quo warranto and was advised that the filing of same is a "go."