green
Positive treatment
Contested · 19% via dissents
Quoted verbatim 1×
10.4 score
“judicial policy preferences may not be used to override valid legislative enactments, for the general assembly should be the final arbiter of public policy.”
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 22 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Turk v. Oiler
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
judicial policy preferences may not be used to override valid legislative enactments, for the general assembly should be the final arbiter of public policy.
discussed
Cited "see"
Musgrave v. Yost
See Beagle v. Walden, 78 Ohio St.3d 59, 62 (1997) (“‘“[t]he legislature is the final arbiter of public policy, unless its acts contravene the state or federal Constitutions.”’ State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St. 3d 222, 224 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 675 , quoting State v. Kavlich (1986), 33 Ohio App. 3d 240, 246 , 515 N.E.2d 652, 657-658 (Markus, C.J., concurring)”). {¶14} Upon review, the Court finds that Requester’s second request for an extension of time filed on April 15, 2024, is not well taken and the Court denies Requester’s request.
discussed
Cited "see"
Isreal v. Franklin Cty. Commrs.
See Beagle v. Walden, 78 Ohio St.3d 59, 62 , 676 N.E.2d 506 (1997) (“ ‘ “The legislature is the final arbiter of public policy, unless its acts contravene the state or federal Constitutions.” ’ State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St. 3d 222, 224 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 675 , quoting State v. Kavlich (1986), 33 Ohio App. 3d 240, 246 , 515 N.E.2d 652, 657-658 (Markus, C.J., concurring)”). {¶15} Isreal’s motion of November 21, 2019, is not well-taken.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Gonzalez
(2×)
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222 , 553 N.E.2d 672 . 30 .
discussed
Cited "see"
McClain v. Northwest Community Corr. Ctr., Judicial Corr. Bd.
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 673-674 . {¶23} “ * * * {¶24} “Members of the General Assembly are accountable to their constituents because they are elected to office.
discussed
Cited "see"
McClain v. Northwest Community Corrections Center
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 673-674 . {¶ 23} “* * * {¶ 24} “Members of the General Assembly are accountable to, their constituents because they are elected to office.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Jones
(2×)
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223-224 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 674-675 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Jones
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223-224 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 674-675 .
cited
Cited "see"
Chambers v. St. Mary's School
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 673-674 . {¶ 15} A bill may originate in either the House of Representatives or the Senate.
cited
Cited "see"
Chambers v. St. Mary's School
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 673-674 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. McGriff
See Smorgala, 50 Ohio St.3d at 224 , 553 N.E.2d at 674-675 , where the court addresses State v. Dress (1982), 10 Ohio App.3d 258 , 10 OBR 372, 461 N.E.2d 1312 .
cited
Cited "see"
Cannon v. Catalytic, Inc.
See State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 673 .
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. South (Slip Opinion)
(4×)
See, e.g., Painter v. Graley, 70 Ohio St.3d 377, 385 , 639 N.E.2d 51 (1994), citing State v. Smorgala, 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672 (1990). {¶ 32} It is fully within the province of the General Assembly to set the penalty for a third-degree-felony-OVI offense.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State Ex Rel. Ross v. Crawford County Board of Elections
See R.C. 121.22(C) (“All meetings of any public body are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times” [emphasis added]); see also Matheny, 62 Ohio St.2d at 368 , 16 O.O.3d 411 , 405 N.E.2d 1041 , and TBC Westlake, 81 Ohio St.3d at 61-62, 689 N.E.2d 32 . {¶ 31} Finally, although it may be preferable from a general policy standpoint that boards of elections vote and decide challenges in public, at open meetings, “[j]udicial policy preferences may not be used to override valid legislative enactments, for the General Assembly should be the final arbiter of public policy.�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In the Matter of My Sister's Place, Unpublished Decision (10-9-2002)
Compare State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222 , 553 N.E.2d 672 , paragraph one of the syllabus (rejecting judicial creation of such exceptions) and State v. Biddle , supra (encouraging such judicial activism).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Kulch v. Structural Fibers, Inc.
See, e.g., State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 674 ; State ex rel.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Kulch v. Structural Fibers, Inc.
See, e.g., State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222, 223 , 553 N.E.2d 672, 674 ; State ex rel.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
West Virginia Electric Supply Co. v. Ohio River Plaza Associates Ltd.
See, e.g., State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222 , 553 N.E.2d 672 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Calihan v. Fullen
Accord In re Estate of Wallace, supra; see, also, State v. Smorgala (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 222 , 553 N.E.2d 672 (courts may not create a public policy exception to the physician-patient privilege); Storey, supra (Peggy Bryant, J., dissenting) (Floyd does not apply to a question of privilege under Civ.R. 26 because Civ.R. 26 lacks a provision comparable to Civ.R. 16 on waiver).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Geauga County Bar Association
v.
Taber
v.
Taber
No. 89-2215.
Ohio Supreme Court.
Apr 25, 1990.
Daniel E. Bond and David A. McGee, for relator.,
Timothy J. Taber, pro se.
Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright.
Published
Per Curiam.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for twice violating DR 6-101(A)(3). Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.