Court hears appeal over Michigan primary election
Lawyer Blogs
A three-judge panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals expressed skepticism about the legal standing of Michigan's imperiled Jan. 15 presidential primary at a hearing Thursday afternoon. But the judges also indicated they need more time to decide whether to overturn a lower court decision to block it.
The judges closely questioned lawyers representing Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, the state's chief elections officer, about the justification for restricting access to voter lists generated by the election to the Democratic and Republican parties, a practice the Ingham County Circuit Court found to be unconstitutional.
Lawyers defending the primary law said the Legislature could restrict access if that was deemed necessary to make the election possible and secure the participation of several million voters who would not participate if the two parties used a caucus or convention nominating process.
The appellate trio -- Chief Judge William Whitbeck and Judges Patrick Meter and Donald Owens -- also pressed state lawyers, who had requested a decision by today, for a few more days to consider the case.
Elections officials said they need a decision as soon as possible so that absentee ballots can be ready for distribution 45 days before the election as required by law.
The lawsuit was filed by East Lansing political consultant Mark Grebner and a group of citizens and activists that included former Free Press political columnist Hugh McDiarmid.
After Thursday's hearing, Grebner said the plaintiffs have no objection to the primary, only to the method for handling the voter lists that was devised by party leadership and muscled through the Legislature.
"If some method can be devised which allows the primary to proceed, while rejecting the idea of election records as property of the two major parties, the plaintiffs would be very happy," he said.
Related listings
-
Doc Once Banned From Executions Hired
Lawyer Blogs 11/15/2007A surgeon once barred from participating in state executions because of a federal judge's concerns about his dyslexia and lack of expertise has been hired for a federal government execution team, according to court records.The federal ruling keeping ...
-
Supreme Court May Target Second Amendment
Lawyer Blogs 11/15/2007The Supreme Court took no action Tuesday in the case involving the District of Columbia's ban on handguns.The justices discussed the case at their private conference on Friday, but reached no resolution.Four justices must vote to grant an appeal. The...
-
Supreme Court takes no action in handgun ban case
Lawyer Blogs 11/13/2007[##_1L|1182206153.jpg|width="104" height="138" alt=""|_##]Both sides in a closely watched legal battle over the District of Columbia's strict gun-control law are urging the Supreme Court to hear the case. If the justices agree — a step they may annou...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.