The Supreme Court of Ohio has decided to discontinue the acceptance of "public right" cases, a legal avenue established in 1999 that allowed individuals to file lawsuits without personal injury. This decision was made by rejecting a precedent set by the State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward case, which permitted litigants to pursue legal action for the "enforcement or protection of a public right."
Justice R. Patrick DeWine, writing for the majority, stated, “It was wrong when it was decided and remains wrong today.” He emphasized that standing requires an individual to have suffered an injury in fact as per the Ohio Constitution.
The court's decision arose from a case involving George Martens, a Findlay property owner who lacked standing in his lawsuit against judges from Findlay Municipal Court and Hancock County Common Pleas Court regarding unpaid municipal income taxes. Martens had invoked the public-right doctrine but had no pending legal actions against him at the time.
Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer and Joseph T. Deters supported Justice DeWine’s opinion. However, Justice Jennifer Brunner agreed with the dismissal but opposed overruling Sheward in this context, stating that it was not appropriate given that the Third District did not address Sheward nor did Martens' opponents request its overruling.
The ruling marks an end to over two decades where no party successfully relied on the public-right doctrine before Ohio's Supreme Court since its establishment post-Sheward. The decision also highlighted criticism of Sheward as contrary to judicial power principles.
In her concurring opinion, Justice Brunner noted Martens represented himself without sufficient briefing from involved parties and criticized how the majority approached eliminating public-right standing.
Martens’ appeal included claims regarding jurisdictional issues over tax recovery cases in local courts but failed due to lack of statutory authorization or special interest in allegedly misused court funds.
Justice Brunner argued that discussion about overruling Sheward should be reserved for more suitable cases where parties thoroughly debate its relevance.