# Voinovich v. Ferguson

> Ohio Supreme Court · February 14, 1992 · 63 Ohio St. 3d 198

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6764622

## Case

- **Full name:** Voinovich v. Ferguson
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 14, 1992
- **Citations:** 63 Ohio St. 3d 198; 586 N.E.2d 1020; 1992 Ohio LEXIS 1698
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Sweeney
- **Judges:** Brown, Douglas, Fifth, Holmes, Milligan, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6764622

## Opinion text

Sweeney, J.,
dissenting. In my view, the parties lack standing to bring this action and, therefore, I believe the cause should be dismissed. Any opinion emanating from this court on the merits of this so-called controversy would be purely advisory and should not be sanctioned by this court. In addition, I believe this court has done a grave disservice to all concerned by issuing multiple result-oriented opinions in support of a non-substantive entry without the benefit of oral argument. Even assuming that standing is not an issue, this court has eliminated a most valuable tool for determining the merit of the various arguments raised by the parties.
Nevertheless, assuming arguendo, that the parties do have proper standing to bring this action, I would concur in the well-reasoned and cogent analysis articulated by Justice Resnick in her dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6764622. Public record. Not legal advice.