Case Summary
**Case Summary: Arthur Lavin v. Jon Husted**
**Docket Number:** 4426000
**Court:** (Specify jurisdiction, e.g., Ohio Supreme Court, if applicable)
**Date:** (Specify the date of filing or relevant dates)
**Parties Involved:**
- **Plaintiff:** Arthur Lavin
- **Defendant:** Jon Husted (Secretary of State)
**Background:**
Arthur Lavin, a citizen and possibly a candidate or voter, filed a lawsuit against Jon Husted, who was serving as the Ohio Secretary of State at the time. The case arose from issues pertaining to election laws, voter rights, or administrative procedures related to the electoral process in Ohio.
**Issues:**
1. The central issue in the case involves (briefly state the specific legal question or conflict, e.g., challenges to election procedures, claims of voter suppression, or disputes over ballot access).
2. (Include any additional legal theories or claims raised, if applicable.)
**Arguments:**
- **Plaintiff's Argument:** Lavin may argue that Husted's actions or policies were unconstitutional, discriminatory, or violated federal or state election laws. (Include specifics about Lavin's position or the relief he seeks).
- **Defendant's Argument:** Husted likely defended his actions as lawful and in accordance with state election policies designed to protect the integrity of the electoral process. (Summarize Husted's legal defenses).
**Court's Decision:**
(The outcome of the case, including whether the court ruled in favor of Lavin or Husted, and any legal reasoning provided by the court.)
**Significance:**
This case highlights significant aspects of electoral law, including (mention broader implications regarding voters' rights, the administration of elections, or other relevant legal precedents).
**Conclusion:**
The ruling in this case will have implications for future election-related litigation and may impact policies governing electoral procedures in Ohio.
---
**Note:** To complete the summary accurately, specific details such as the judge's name, case date, oral arguments, or verdict should be inserted, and you may want to look for actual case law material to derive accurate information.