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.


Court Rulemaking

Publication Date


Document Type


Place of Original Publication

Case Western Reserve Law Review

Publication Information

29 Case Western Reserve Law Review 16 (1978)

Included in

Evidence Commons


COinS Paul C. Giannelli Faculty Bio