Damschroder protester claims lawyer is wrong

Brewer said the relevant state law, ORC 3513.014, says “any qualified elector” may file a protest.
Sandusky Register Staff
Mar 7, 2014


An election board hearing over Rhonda Damschroder’s candidacy for the U.S. House, held Wednesday, was still fraying tempers Thursday.

John Brewer, a Clyde resident who filed the protest and then walked out Wednesday rather than present his case, said Thursday he objects to two statements made by attorney Donald Brey, who represented Mrs. Damschroder.

Brewer contends that contrary to Brey’s claim, Brewer did have standing to file a protest. Brewer said the relevant state law, ORC 3513.014, says “any qualified elector” may file a protest.

Brewer also took issue with Brey’s statement that Brewer has repeatedly voted Democrat in recent elections.

“In point of fact I have taken a Democrat ballot only 64 percent of the time. After I vote Republican in May, I will have taken a Democrat ballot only 60 percent of the time” he said.

The Sandusky Register was the first paper to call Brewer for comment after he walked out of Wednesday’s meeting. When Brewer took the call, he said he did not know what the outcome of the meeting was.

During Wednesday’s meeting, Brey accused Brewer of making “maliciously false accusations” when he accused Rhonda Damschroder of filing a false declaration of candidacy. He also accused Brewer of filing a frivolous complaint that Brewer was unwilling to defend in public.

“It would be helpful to all of us if he hadn’t rushed out of the window like a coward” Brey said.



Repuglicons rule in Sandco. Accept it. Own it. Laws be damned.


Does it really matter? Brewers protest is frivolous. The ORC 3513.041 (which is the correct section, not 3513.014), states that the only reason that a protest can prevent the write in candidate is "If the board finds that the candidate is not an elector of the state, district, county, or political subdivision in which the candidate seeks election to office or has not fully complied with the requirements of Title XXXV of the Revised Code in regard to the candidate's candidacy, the candidate's declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate shall be determined to be invalid and shall be rejected; otherwise, it shall be determined to be valid. The determination of the board is final." There doesn't appear to be a provision for appeal, so this issue is dead.


@ Knuckle Dragger:

What about the fact that her Declaration of Intent to run for the office is in fact fraudulent as she has no intent to actually run for the office? One of the requirements of Title XXXV which as you note she must comply is to not falsify a filing with the elections board.
Thus, is there not a potential violation of RC 3599.46 Elections Falsification? I think a Complaint for Elections Falsification is filed with the Ohio Elections Commission in Columbus and not at the local board level.

3599.36 Election falsification.
No person, either orally or in writing, on oath lawfully administered or in a statement made under penalty of election falsification, shall knowingly state a falsehood as to a material matter relating to an election in a proceeding before a court, tribunal, or election official, or in a matter in relation to which an oath or statement under penalty of election falsification is authorized by law, including a statement required for verifying or filing any declaration of candidacy, declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate, nominating petition, or other petition presented to or filed with the secretary of state, a board of elections, or any other public office for the purpose of becoming a candidate for any elective office, including the office of a political party, for the purpose of submitting a question or issue to the electors at an election, or for the purpose of forming a political party.

Whoever violates this section is guilty of election falsification, a felony of the fifth degree.

Every paper, card, or other document relating to any election matter that calls for a statement to be made under penalty of election falsification shall be accompanied by the following statement in bold face capital letters: "Whoever commits election falsification is guilty of a felony of the fifth degree."


You could argue that when a voter switches parties in a primary (signing a document pledging to support the party you are joining in the general elections) when you have no intentions to support the party is election falsification


The problem with prosecuting voters is you have to prove there is no intent to support the party. That's hard to do short of an admission to the media as occurred with Mrs. Damschroeder.

Thus, the distinction is Mrs Damschroeder has announced publicly that she has no intention of running for the office despite the fact that she declared the exact opposite on her election documents. That appears to me to be an open and shut case of election falsification and Mr. Brewer could consider refilling his complaint as election falsification with the appropriate agency.

Here's the link to filing a Complaint at the Ohio Elections Commission. http://elc.ohio.gov/complaint.stm. The site claims that false statement claims are expedited.

I also think this statute may be applicable:http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3599.14.


I don't think Brewer's protest is frivolous. Those are his feelings about it but legally I think it's just fine. I also support Damschroder as the candidate and any way that he can be able to run is perfectly fine by me. I don't know what the big deal is about. Unless Mr. Brewer was planning to run.


It's frivolous from the standpoint of the ORC that he is quoting. The ORC specifically state what the challenge is for, that being that the candidate is not an elector (voter) in the county, state, and so on that the candidate is running in. His objection was for reasons other than this which the law does not provide for, hence frivolous.

Erie County Resident

Brewer gets up and walks out of the hearing before it even started.
Now he thinks he has a leg to stand on.
Hey Brewer, shut up and move on you are delusional.


Mr. Brewer has no case, this is a man who left a hearing he requested. He is just wasting time


Like I have stated in a previous post Mr. Brewer always tries to puts up a big argument but comes up short. He ran like a coward with his tail between his legs and didn't put up any argument. In my eyes he has no credibility and I do not understand why the Register is even covering stories that even involve him they were there and saw him run with their own eyes.

John Harville

Mrs. Damschroder is running for "the U.S. House"?
Cats... at least Mr. Brewer showed up for the hearing. The U.S. House candidate didn't.

BTW... how do you "rush out a window"?

John Harville


Did I miss this article in The Register about the Port Clinton doctor who gave Gene Damschroder a 'pass' to fly. The crash killed the husband and daughter of Common Pleas Judge Ansted and daughter's fiancé. Cases go to trial next week.


The Toledo Blade reports that the cases just settled.
C.O.D. appears to be extreme hubris on part of the late Gene Damschroeder and the doctor.

Dr. Mc Tague is also an attorney and the former Ottawa County Coroner. Appears he allowed himself to get caught up in politics once he became an attorney. He should have stuck with medicine and never gotten mixed up in politics or law.

Wonder how long before the Supreme Court moves on his law license for falsifying official documents? After all Ottawa County and the Bar association in particular enjoy destroying smart and talented people who are not part of the "club".


John Harville granted Mr. Brewer showed up to the meeting but left even before it got started. May I remind you that he was the one that filed the motion in the first place but then didn't even present a case. It sounds to me that his short temper got the best of him when he found out that Mrs. Damschroder wasn't there. Maybe if he controlled his temper and stayed no one could have made comments about how cowardly he ran out of the meeting. Just saying.

John Harville

After the plane crash, Rex Damschroder said his father had no medical issues and it was just an unfortunate accident.

Cats... if Mr. Brewer had stayed he would have had to challenge the libelous statements everyone let stand. Somehow, I don't thnk the fat boy has sung yet.


It appears that Mr. Brewer's hatred for the Damschroder family along with his friendship of Bill Young, and his loyalty to the Democratic party is causing him to look foolish


Re: "fter the plane crash, Rex Damschroder said his father had no medical issues and it was just an unfortunate accident."

Sorry but statements made by Damschroder made about his fasters health have what to do with his wife's running for office?

I also have a father in his 80's and I may know his general health I don't know details about his eyesight. It doesn't come up in day to day conversations. If his father passes his annual medical he would assume his health is OK. My dad sold his plane when he was 65 cause his insurance doubled. He rented from then on when he did fly till he was around 75 and no longer passed his physical. Was Damschroder under oath when he made that statement? If not he may have meant as far as he knew his dad had no issues with his health. I can honestly say my dad has none but I would not know details of his health, I have no reason to.

I have no right to get information on my fathers health according to the hippa privacy rules and law. Sorry but your statement is just stretching credulity way too much.

Sides what does any of this have to do with his wife being able to run for office? It would not be a consideration in the deal with his wife running for office. Two different issues.