Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 309
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 309.12 (2026)

Protection of public funds

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 1, 1953
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 1 - 100th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

Upon being satisfied that funds of the county, or public moneys in the hands of the county treasurer or belonging to the county, are about to be or have been misapplied, or that any such public moneys have been illegally drawn or withheld from the county treasury, or that a contract, in contravention of law, has been executed or is about to be entered into, or that such a contract was procured by fraud or corruption, or that any property, real or personal, belonging to the county is being illegally used or occupied, or that such property is being used or occupied in violation of contract, or that the terms of a contract made by or on behalf of the county are being or have been violated, or that money is due the county, the prosecuting attorney may, by civil action in the name of the state, apply to a court of competent jurisdiction, to restrain such contemplated misapplication of funds, or the completion of such illegal contract, or to recover, for the use of the county, all public moneys so misapplied or illegally drawn or withheld from the county treasury, or to recover damages, for the benefit of the county, resulting from the execution of such illegal contract, or to recover, for the benefit of the county, such real or personal property so used or occupied, or to recover for the benefit of the county, damages resulting from the nonperformance of the terms of such contract, or to otherwise enforce it, or to recover such money as is due the county.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1954–2023 · leading case: State ex rel. Cuyahoga Cty. v. Jones Lang LaSalle Great Lakes Corp. Real Est. Partners, L.L.C., 2017 Ohio 4066 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State ex rel. Cuyahoga Cty. v. Jones Lang LaSalle Great Lakes Corp. Real Est. Partners, L.L.C., 2017 Ohio 4066 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 26× “The Trial Court erred in dismissing Appellant’s claim for violation of Ohio Rev. Code § 309.12 (Count 1) (contract in contravention of law) for lack of standing.”
State Ex Rel. Jones v. Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 705 N.E.2d 1247 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 7× “Deters, requesting that the prosecutor institute an action, pursuant to R.C. 309.12, to enjoin the transfer of county funds to purchase paint and supplies, and to enjoin the use of prisoners to paint the Justice Center.”
State Ex Rel. Teamsters Local Union No. 436 v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 2012 Ohio 1861 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 2× “*50 {¶ 11} An analysis of standing in a statutory taxpayer action against a county entity must begin with R.C. 309.12, which allows a county prosecutor to initiate legal action to restrain the contemplated misapplication of county funds or completion of illegal contracts or to…”
State ex rel. Varnau v. Wenninger, 2012 Ohio 224 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 3× “13, because he never demanded that the prosecuting attorney institute a civil action to protect public funds pursuant to R.C. 309.12, and he never instituted any such action.”
City of Cincinnati Ex Rel. Ritter v. Cincinnati Reds, L.L.C., 782 N.E.2d 1225 (Ohio Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “That would have required Ritter to make a written request that the county prosecutor apply to a trial court to protect public funds under R.C. 309.12. He did not do so. {¶ 23} Instead, the trial court threw Cincinnati out and joined Hamilton County as a necessary party to the…”
State ex rel. Doran v. Preble Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 2013 Ohio 3579 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “03), and Ohio's taxpayer statutes (R.C. 309.12 and R.C. 209.13), as well as a claim that the Village was entitled to a writ of mandamus pursuant to R.”
Ohioans for Concealed Carry v. Columbus, 2019 Ohio 3105 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “"); Caspar at 20 (finding cause was not taxpayer action because "action to compel fringe benefits for [police officers'] own benefit" did not represent the aim 3 See R.C. 309.12 et seq. 4 We note that in Teamsters, a statutory taxpayer action against a county entity, pursuant to…”
State v. McKelvey, 232 N.E.2d 391 (Ohio 1967). · cites it 4× “” (See Section 309.12, Revised Code, infra.) If appellee accepted *95 payment from a passenger, then his application for public money was illegal since under these circumstances he had no expense.”
State v. Yavorcik, 2018 Ohio 1824 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “13 allows a taxpayer to institute a civil action where a county prosecuting attorney fails to bring a suit for the benefit of the county as if brought by the prosecuting attorney under stated circumstances involving the protection of public funds under R.C. 309.12. We reiterate…”
State ex rel. Nimon v. Vill. of Springdale, 215 N.E.2d 592 (Ohio 1966). · cites it 2× “Attention is invited, however, to the apparent distinction between the actions maintainable by a prosecuting attorney under Section 309.12, Revised Code, and the duties imposed upon a municipal solicitor under Sections 733.”
U.S. Corr. Corp. v. Ohio Dep't of Indus. Relations, 652 N.E.2d 766 (Ohio 1995). · cites it 2× “Prior to the commencement of this litigation, Monahan requested, in writing, that the Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney apply to a court, pursuant to R.C. 309.12, to enjoin the county from paying any funds to USCC under the lease agreement.”
State ex rel. Flaiz v. Merscorp, Inc., 2017 Ohio 7126 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8× “{¶6} Appellants opposed the motion, arguing they had standing and a right to pursue their claims, pursuant to R.C. 309.12, which authorizes a prosecuting attorney to file suit when “money is due the county.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.