Legal Document

396 U.S. 41 90 Supreme Court Reporter 206 24 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 209 Paul M. BROCKINGTON, Appellant,v.James Atlantic RHODES, Governor of Ohio, et al. Number 31. Argued Oct. 22, 1969. Mandamus proceeding to compel Ohio and others place plaintiff's name on ballot for November, 1968 election as an independent candidate House Representatives from a particular district. The Common Pleas denied writ mandamus, appeal was taken. Appeals the Eighth Judicial District affirmed judgment, dismissed want substantial constitutional question, plaintiff appealed. held that case moot because congressional over. Judgment vacated cause remanded such proceedings court might deem appropriate. Benjamin Sheerer, Cleveland, appellant. Robert D. Macklin, Columbus, appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 appellant sought run in November Twenty-first Congressional Ohio. His nominating petition bore signatures 899 voters district, little over 1% those district who had voted gubernatorial contest at last election. Board Elections ruled appellant's insufficient put his ballot, it did not contain 7% qualified voters, law then required.1 petitioned challenging requirement 'unreasonably high excessive, * disproportionate when compared 100 required party candidates,2 arbitrary capricious, [and] invidious discrimination without any relationship constitutionally justified ends *.' He urged proper standard determining sufficiency prevailed 60 years until enactment rule 1952. prayed immediate order restraining printing ballots; also mandamus commanding 'to certify relator's petition' directing appellees do all things necessary upon Twenty-First 5, 1968, general suit purport be class action, he no declaratory relief. 2 On August mandamus. October 23 question. appealed this pursuant 28 Code KF62 § 1257, we noted probable jurisdiction, 393 1078, 89 877, 21 771. While pending here, amended controlling statute, effective 30, 1969, reducing signature 4%. 3 We think recent statutory amendment has rendered moot. For consistently unconstitutionality percentage excess imposed prior 1952, obtained only about thus could have won even under statute currently written. Cf. Hall versus Beals, 45, 200, 214. 4 Rather, view limited nature relief sought, is allege intended office future elections. attempt maintain action behalf himself other putative candidates, present or future. sue similarly situated law. Rev. Ann. 2307.21 (1953). seek although avenue too open him. §§ 2721.01-2721.15 5 Instead, 1968. In extraordinary remedy, available petitioner showing clear legal right. State ex rel. Gerspacher Coffinberry, 157 St. 32, 104 North Eastern Reporter, 2nd 1; Stanley Cook, 146 348, 66 207. does lie review determination by ineligible assume seeks invalid, absence allegations fraud, corruption, abuse discretion, disregard statutes applicable principles. Flynn Elections, 164 193, 129 623; cf. Hanna Milburn, 170 9, 11, 161 891, 893. instant 'must establish act which respondents perform one they are bound virtue their offices, but he, relator, right duty enforced.' court, passing merits issues raised parties, found established basis evidence. 6 It now impossible grant limited, courts. Accordingly, judgment must vacated, costs Court, may 7 so ordered. 8 remanded. Rev.Code 3513.257 (Supp.1968) provided pertinent part: 'The representative congress, shall signed less than seven per cent number electors governor next preceding regular state district.' Under nomination political Representative must, enter primary, obtain membership within either 5% election, whichever less. 3513.05 (Supp.1968).

Classification Label: 1