Last Updated: November 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM
Fitrakis v. Husted (federal court)
Case Information
Date Filed: November 5, 2012
State: Ohio
Issue: Voting Technology
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:12-cv-01015)
Issue:
Whether Ohio's use of certain software for electronic voting machines violates plaintiff's rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983; whether Secretary of State Husted, as a public official, spent public funds without authorization.
Status:
Complaint and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Filed 11/5/12. Hearing set for 11/6/12. Motion for Restraining Order denied 11/6/12. Voluntary Dismissal Notice filed 11/20/12.
District Court Documents
- Complaint
(filed 11/5/12) - Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
(filed 11/5/12)
- Notice of Oral Hearing on Tuesday, November 6, 2012
(filed 11/5/12) - Memorandum in Opposition of Election Systems & Software, Inc.
(filed 11/5/12)
- Memorandum in Opposition of Jon Husted
(filed 11/6/12) - Notes from Nov. 6 hearing (11/6/12)
- Jon Husted's Notice of Filing of Declarations
(filed 11/6/12)
- Declaration of Matthew Damschroeder
(filed 11/6/12) - Letter from U.S. Election Assistance Commission
(filed 11/6/12) - Declaration of Brandi Laser Seskes
(filed 11/6/12) - Declaration of Douglas Lumpkin
(filed 11/6/12)
- Declaration of Matthew Damschroeder
- Minutes of TRO Hearing
(filed 11/6/12) - Motion for TRO denied
(filed 11/6/12) - Plaintiff's Notice of Dismissal
(filed 11/20/12)


Commentary
Gerrymandering as Viewpoint Discrimination: A "Functional Equivalence" Test
Edward B. Foley
A First Amendment test for identifying when a map is functionally equivalent to a facially discriminatory statute.
more commentary...