Abstract
The common-law doctrine of failure to exhaust administrative remedies has generally been held to be a prerequisite to judicial review in statutorily defined administrative law appeal processes. Similarly, the United States Supreme Court in interpreting the federal administrative law appeal process, and the case law on Ohio's administrative law appeal process, have found that the doctrine of exhaustion is a jurisdictional bar to a declaratory judgment action except while challenging the constitutionality of a municipal or administrative decision. However, according to the holding in Jones v. Chagrin Falls, this may no longer be the case in Ohio. This article discusses the Jones case in detail, starting with the factual and procedural history in Parts II, and then moving on to the court’s opinion and rationale in Part III. The article finishes up with the author’s overall analysis of the decision in Part IV.
Recommended Citation
Joseph W. Diemert Jr.,
Jones v. Chagrin Falls: Muddying the Statutory Waters of Ohio's Administrative Law Appeal Process ,
45 Clev. St. L. Rev.
639
(1997)
available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol45/iss4/9