Court Opinion

ID: 3791560
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-06 07:38:36.752738+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:30:30.441730
License: Public Domain

OPINION — AG — AN ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO HOLD THE OFFICES OF CITY ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND BE PAID FOR BOTH POSITIONS FOR A CITY ATTORNEY BY ACCEPTING APPOINTMENT TO THE OFFICE OF ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, IPSO FACTO VACATES THE FORMER OFFICE UNDER THE RULE ANNOUNCED IN GIBSON V. CROWDER, 196 OKL. 406, 165 P.2d 628 (DUAL OFFICE HOLDING) CITE: 11 Ohio St. 1961 541 [11-541], 51 Ohio St. 1941 6 [51-6], 11 Ohio St. 1961 804 [11-804], 37 Ohio St. 1961 569 [37-569], 34 Ohio St. 1961 51 [34-51] [34-51], 11 Ohio St. 1961 958.8 [11-958.8], 47 Ohio St. 1961 106 [47-106] [47-106], 11 Ohio St. 1961 962.20 [11-962.20], 11 Ohio St. 1961 632 [11-632] [11-632], 11 Ohio St. 1961 557.1 [11-557.1], 51 Ohio St. 1961 6 [51-6] [51-6] (W. J. MONROE) ** SEE OPINION NO. 91-509 (1990) ** SEE: OPINION NO. 70-299 (1970) **