This Article explores the need for a doctrine permitting, but limiting, the overruling of prior precedent; Ohio’s adoption of such a rule; and whether the current standard will endure. To fully appreciate the need for a rule that permits but also limits the overruling of prior Supreme Court precedent, it is helpful to understand the historical context in which the Galatis rule developed. Section II of this Article discusses the political and ideological changes that swept the Ohio judiciary in the early 1990s with the election of two new Justices to the Ohio Supreme Court. The new Justices quickly set about changing Ohio’s legal landscape by striking down legislation and overruling judicial precedent. Section III reveals that, within a decade, opposing interests mobilized their political base leading to a new and different political/ideological majority. Rather than undertake yet another revision to Ohio’s judicial precedent, Chief Justice O’Connor and the new majority crafted a new rule of stare decisis. This new rule promised to mitigate the instability of such political changes, yet still allow changes in the common law—providing both predictability and flexibility. Section IV explores the durability of the Galatis rule for overruling prior precedent of the Ohio Supreme Court. The question is: will it last?
"Flexible Predictability: Stare Decisis In Ohio,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 48
, Article 2.
Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol48/iss1/2