Hicks for a Better Clermont v. Ohio Election Integrity Comm.

Summary

The Tenth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed a Franklin County Court of Common Pleas decision invalidating an Ohio Elections Commission rule and remanding a campaign-finance matter for rehearing. The appellate court held that former R.C. 3517.157(D), as a specific provision governing the commission, authorized procedures inconsistent with the general requirements of R.C. Chapter 119, and that Adm.Code 3517-1-11 was not internally inconsistent. The court remanded for the common pleas court to address the campaign committee’s separate procedural due process arguments in the first instance.

Holdings

1. Former R.C. 3517.157(D), as the more specific statute governing the commission's handling of complaints, expressly authorized the commission to conduct hearings under procedures inconsistent with R.C. Chapter 119. The common pleas court therefore erred by invalidating Adm.Code 3517-1-11(A)(3)(e) solely because it differed from Chapter 119 procedures.
2. Adm.Code 3517-1-11(A) is not internally inconsistent. The rule permits the full commission, after conducting a preliminary review, either to order a full hearing when a significant factual dispute or material factual uncertainty exists or to make a final disposition when appropriate.

Questions Presented

1. Whether former R.C. 3517.157(D) authorized the commission to adopt hearing procedures inconsistent with the general procedural requirements of R.C. Chapter 119.
2. Whether Adm.Code 3517-1-11(A) was internally inconsistent because it permitted the full commission to make a final disposition during a preliminary review.
3. Whether the administrative rule complied with procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment and Article I, Section 16 of the Ohio Constitution.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded