DeRolph v. State II
Ohio Supreme Court
754 N.E.2d 1184 (2001)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
After years of prior litigation, the state of Ohio (defendant) adopted a new statutory formula for funding the state’s educational system to meet requirements set by the Ohio Supreme Court in prior decisions. The base-cost formula of House Bill (H.B.) 94 used 127 model school districts that met at least 20 of 27 statutory academic-performance standards to determine the cost of providing an adequate education per enrolled student in the state. The formula used wealth screens to remove school districts in the top and bottom 5 percent of income and property wealth from the pool of districts meeting adequate education standards and, because of rounding, included some districts that did not actually meet the statutory-performance criteria. Additionally, because of an echo effect, the state chose to use the lower of two fiscal years spending data for the calculation to adjust for districts that spent more than the base level due to line-item expenditures and outside revenue. The Ohio Supreme Court had continuing jurisdiction of the case and reviewed the state’s new formula.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moyer, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.