Case Title: State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth

Citation: 2012-Ohio-69

Docket Number: 2011-2152

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2012-01-11T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-69.] 
 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2012-OHIO-69 
THE STATE EX REL. WATERS v. SPAETH ET AL. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets,  
it may be cited as State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth,  
Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-69.] 
Elections—Mandamus—Writ sought to compel respondent to place relator’s 
name on ballot as Republican, notwithstanding his recent Libertarian 
affiliation—Writ denied. 
(No. 2011-2152—Submitted January 10, 2012—Decided January 11, 2012.) 
IN MANDAMUS. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} This is an expedited election action for a writ of mandamus to 
compel respondents, the Warren County Board of Elections and its members, to 
place the name of relator, Robert E. Waters, on the ballot as a candidate for the 
Warren County Republican Party Central Committee, Precinct 15, of the city of 
Lebanon, at the March 6, 2012 primary election.  Because Waters voted in a 
primary election as a member of a different political party within the preceding 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
two calendar years, he is barred from candidacy in the March 6, 2012 Republican 
primary election.  Therefore, we deny the writ. 
Facts 
{¶ 2} Waters is a registered voter residing in Lebanon in Warren County.  
In February 2010, he filed a declaration of candidacy and petition to be a 
Libertarian Party candidate for state representative.  In May 2010, he voted in the 
Libertarian Party primary election.  At the November 2010 election for governor, 
the Libertarian Party candidate failed to obtain five percent of the vote. 
{¶ 3} On December 7, 2011, Waters filed a petition to be a candidate for 
the Warren County Republican Party Central Committee for the 15th Precinct of 
Lebanon at the March 6, 2012 Republican primary election.  At a December 13, 
2011 meeting of respondent Warren County Board of Elections, both board 
members present voted to not certify Waters’s candidacy. 
{¶ 4} Eight days later, on December 21, Waters filed this expedited-
election action for a writ of mandamus to compel the board and its members to 
certify his candidacy.  Respondents filed an answer on December 30, and the 
parties filed briefs and evidence pursuant to the accelerated schedule in 
S.Ct.Prac.R. 10.9. 
{¶ 5} This cause is now before the court for our consideration of the 
merits. 
Analysis 
Mandamus 
{¶ 6} Waters requests a writ of mandamus to compel the board of 
elections to place his name on the March 6, 2012 primary election ballot as a 
candidate for member of the Warren County Republican Party Central 
Committee.  To be entitled to the writ, Waters must establish a clear legal right to 
the requested relief, a clear legal duty on the part of the board and its members to 
provide it, and the lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.  
January Term, 2012 
3 
 
State ex rel. Eshleman v. Fornshell, 125 Ohio St.3d 1, 2010-Ohio-1175, 925 
N.E.2d 609, ¶ 20.  Because of the proximity of the March 6, 2012 primary 
election, Waters has established that he lacks an adequate remedy in the ordinary 
course of the law.  State ex rel. Owens v. Brunner, 125 Ohio St.3d 130, 2010-
Ohio-1374, 926 N.E.2d 617, ¶ 25; see also S.Ct.Prac.R. 10.9. 
{¶ 7} For the remaining requirements, “ ‘[i]n extraordinary actions 
challenging the decisions of the Secretary of State and boards of elections, the 
standard is whether they engaged in fraud, corruption, or abuse of discretion, or 
acted in clear disregard of applicable legal provisions.’ ”  State ex rel. Husted v. 
Brunner, 123 Ohio St.3d 288, 2009-Ohio-5327, 915 N.E.2d 1215, ¶ 9, quoting 
Whitman v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections, 97 Ohio St.3d 216, 2002-Ohio-5923, 
778 N.E.2d 32, ¶ 11. 
R.C. 3513.191(A) and 3517.01(A)(1) 
{¶ 8} Waters asserts that the board of elections abused its discretion and 
clearly disregarded R.C. 3517.01(A)(1) by denying his candidacy in the 
Republican primary election. 
{¶ 9} R.C. 3513.191(A) prohibits a person’s candidacy at a political 
party’s primary election if the person voted in a different political party’s primary 
election within the two years immediately preceding it: 
 
 
No person shall be a candidate for nomination or election at 
a party primary if the person voted as a member of a different 
political party at any primary election within the current year and 
the immediately preceding two years. 
 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
4 
 
{¶ 10} The applicable version of R.C. 3517.01(A)(1)1 defines “political 
party” as follows: 
 
 
A political party within the meaning of Title XXXV of the 
Revised Code is any group of voters that, at the most recent regular 
state election, polled for its candidate for governor in the state or 
nominees for presidential electors at least five per cent of the entire 
vote cast for that office or that filed with the secretary of state, 
subsequent to any election in which it received less than five per 
cent of that vote, a petition signed by qualified electors equal in 
number to at least one per cent of the total vote for governor or 
nominees for presidential electors at the most recent election, 
declaring their intention of organizing a political party, the name of 
which shall be stated in the declaration, and of participating in the 
succeeding primary election, held in even-numbered years, that 
occurs more than one hundred twenty days after the date of filing. 
 
{¶ 11} Waters claims that the Libertarian Party is not a political party as 
defined in R.C. 3517.01(A)(1) because at the most recent general election in 
November 2010, the Libertarian candidate for governor failed to obtain five 
percent of the vote.  Consequently, he argues, the Libertarian Party does not 
constitute a political party for purposes of R.C. 3513.191(A) so as to bar his 
Republican candidacy.  See State ex rel. Colvin v. Brunner, 120 Ohio St.3d 110, 
                                          
 
1 2011 Am.Sub.H.B. No. 194 amended R.C. 3517.01(A)(1), effective September 30, 2011, but 
that amendment is the subject of a pending referendum petition.  See Secretary of State Directive 
No. 2011-30.  On December 9, 2011, the secretary of state certified that the petition contained 
sufficient signatures for placement of the referendum on the November 2012 election ballot.  
http:www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/mediaCenter/2011/2011-12-09.aspx.   
 
January Term, 2012 
5 
 
2008-Ohio-5041, 896 N.E.2d 979, ¶ 46 (“statutes that relate to the same subject 
matter must be construed in pari materia so as to give full effect to the 
provisions”). 
{¶ 12} Waters’s claim, however, ignores the plain language of the 
applicable statutes. 
{¶ 13} The definition of “political party” in R.C. 3517.01(A)(1) does not 
automatically exclude a group of voters from its definition simply because at the 
most recent regular state election, its gubernatorial candidate or nominees for 
presidential election failed to poll at least five percent of the entire vote for that 
office.  R.C. 3517.01(A)(1) permits a group of voters who failed to meet the 
applicable five-percent threshold to nevertheless qualify as a political party for the 
succeeding primary election ballot if it files with the secretary of state “a petition 
signed by qualified electors equal in number to at least one per cent of the total 
vote for governor or nominees for presidential electors at the most recent election, 
declaring their intention of organizing a political party, the name of which shall be 
stated in the declaration, and of participating in the succeeding primary election, 
held in even-numbered years, that occurs more than one hundred twenty days 
after the date of filing.”  Waters’s complaint did not allege that the Libertarian 
Party failed to meet this alternate method of qualifying as a political party for 
purposes of Ohio’s election laws, and he failed to submit clear and convincing 
evidence that this portion of the statutory definition of “political party” in R.C. 
3517.01(A)(1) was inapplicable.  See State ex rel. Doner v. Zody, __ Ohio St.3d 
__, 2011-Ohio-6117, __ N.E.2d __, paragraph three of the syllabus (“Relators in 
mandamus cases must prove their entitlement to the writ by clear and convincing 
evidence”). 
{¶ 14} Moreover, R.C. 3513.191(A) applies to both “major” political 
parties and “minor” political parties under the R.C. 3517.01(A)(1) definition of 
“political party.” 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
6 
 
{¶ 15} In addition, state election officials must follow the applicable 
requirements of federal election law, including pertinent federal court orders.  See, 
e.g., State ex rel. Painter v. Brunner, 128 Ohio St.3d 17, 2011-Ohio-35, 941 
N.E.2d 782, ¶ 37 (“the secretary of state also has a duty to instruct election 
officials on the applicable requirements of federal election law as well as federal 
court orders that are applicable to them”).  In Libertarian Party of Ohio v. 
Blackwell, 462 F.3d 579 (6th Cir.2006), the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Sixth Circuit held that Ohio’s system for minor-party qualification for ballot 
access violated the rights of political parties and voters to exercise their First 
Amendment rights.  Id. at 594-595.  In 2008, a federal district court ordered, 
pursuant to Blackwell, that the secretary of state place the Libertarian Party of 
Ohio and its candidates on the November 2008 election ballot.  Libertarian Party 
of Ohio v. Brunner, 567 F.Supp.2d 1006, 1016 (S.D.Ohio 2008).  In 2011, a 
federal district court ordered, pursuant to Blackwell, that the secretary of state 
place the Libertarian Party of Ohio and its candidates on the 2011 and 2012 
election ballots.  Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Husted, S.D.Ohio No. 2:11-CV-
722, 2011 WL 3957259 (Sept. 7, 2011), as modified by the nunc pro tunc order 
dated October 18, 2011).  Therefore, notwithstanding R.C. 3517.01(A)(1), federal 
precedent requires the treatment of the Libertarian Party as a “political party” for 
purposes of the election laws. 
{¶ 16} The secretary of state ordered boards of elections to recognize the 
Libertarian Party and certain other minor political parties as political parties 
entitled to ballot access in 2010 and 2012.  See Secretary of State Directive Nos. 
2009-21 and 2011-38.  Based on the applicable law, the secretary of state’s 
construction of the applicable statutory provisions is reasonable and is thus 
entitled to deference.  See Rothenberg v. Husted, 129 Ohio St.3d 447, 2011-Ohio-
4003, 953 N.E.2d 327, ¶ 2.  And the board of elections and its members have a 
duty to follow the secretary of state’s directives.  R.C. 3501.11(P); see also State 
January Term, 2012 
7 
 
ex rel. Coble v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 132, 2011-Ohio-4550, 
956 N.E.2d 282, ¶ 11, fn. 2. 
{¶ 17} Finally, insofar as Waters claims that the Warren County Board of 
Elections treated him differently from how the Franklin County Board of 
Elections treated a comparable candidate, he has not submitted sufficient evidence 
establishing an equal-protection violation, the Warren County Board of Elections 
is not bound by the decisions of another county board of elections, and the issue 
of whether the Franklin County Board of Elections acted properly is not before 
this court. 
{¶ 18} Therefore, the Libertarian Party constituted a political party for 
purposes of applicable election law, and under the plain language of R.C. 
3513.191(A), Waters’s participation in the May 2010 Libertarian primary election 
bars him from being a candidate for central committee member at the March 2012 
Republican primary election.  The board of elections and its members neither 
abused their discretion nor clearly disregarded applicable law by deciding not to 
certify Waters’s candidacy. 
Conclusion 
{¶ 19} Because Waters failed to establish his entitlement to the requested 
extraordinary relief in mandamus, we deny the writ. 
Writ denied. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Robert E. Waters, pro se. 
 
David P. Fornshell, Warren County Prosecuting Attorney, and Keith W. 
Anderson, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondents. 
______________________