Abstract
The Ohio Supreme Court has twice promulgated and the Ohio General Assembly has twice disapproved the proposed Ohio Rules of Evidence. Moreover, the office of the Attorney General has opposed the proposed Rules in an article published in this review. The author examines the arguments against the Rules and concludes that the supreme court has the constitutional authority to prescribe most rules of evidence and that the General Assembly should accept the proposed Rules with amendments.
Keywords
Court Rulemaking
Publication Date
1978
Document Type
Article
Place of Original Publication
Case Western Reserve Law Review
Publication Information
29 Case Western Reserve Law Review 16 (1978)
Repository Citation
Giannelli, Paul C., "The Proposed Ohio Rules of Evidence: The General Assembly, Evidence, and Rulemaking" (1978). Faculty Publications. 424.
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/faculty_publications/424
