From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Armour v. State of Ohio

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D
Sep 4, 1991
775 F. Supp. 1090 (N.D. Ohio 1991)

Opinion

No. 88CV1104Y.

September 4, 1991.

Percy Squire, Bernadette J. Bollas, Bricker Eckler, Columbus, Ohio, Robert A. Douglas, Sr., Youngstown, Ohio, for plaintiffs.

Andrew I. Sutter, Catherine M. Cola, Theresa R. Schaefer, Atty. Gens. Office, Columbus, Ohio, for defendants.

Before NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge, JOHN W. PECK, Senior Circuit Judge, and BATCHELDER, District Judge.


ORDER


Because the majority's ruling in this case requires that the Court retain jurisdiction over this matter pending the drawing of new district lines for the Ohio House of Representatives districts, this case now presents the potential for a conflict of interest for me. Accordingly, I hereby recuse myself from any further participation in the matter, and I have this day advised the Chief Judge of the Circuit of this in order that he may determine whether another judge of the District Court shall be appointed to serve on this panel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Armour v. State of Ohio

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D
Sep 4, 1991
775 F. Supp. 1090 (N.D. Ohio 1991)
Case details for

Armour v. State of Ohio

Case Details

Full title:Ezell ARMOUR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The STATE of OHIO, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D

Date published: Sep 4, 1991

Citations

775 F. Supp. 1090 (N.D. Ohio 1991)

Citing Cases

Quilter v. Voinovich

This evidence includes: a) The 1981 apportionment plan was held to unlawfully dilute minority voting strength…