2013 Ohio 5736
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Public records request by Lipson O'Shea to BOH sought documents in 2008–2011 about elevated lead levels in minors in Cuyahoga County.
- BOH identified 110 files (over 5,000 pages) but concluded records contained protected health information and refused disclosure.
- BOH filed suit for declaratory judgment; 12 lead-assessment files were submitted for in camera review as a representative sample.
- Sample files included forms and notices identifying children, parents, property owners, addresses, and associated health data.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for BOH on the basis that records contained protected health information under R.C. 3701.17 and 149.43(A)(1)(v).
- Court of appeals held the trial court erred, adopting a de novo review and directing redaction rather than blanket denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether records are exempt under 149.43(A)(1)(v) due to protected health information. | Lipson O'Shea: some documents lack P.H.I.; redaction possible. | BOH: many records contain P.H.I. and are prohibited from disclosure. | Not all records are immunized; some non-identifying data may be disclosed after redaction. |
| Whether BOH must redact identifying information rather than refuse disclosure entirely. | Redact P.H.I. and release non-identifying portions. | Any P.H.I. in records makes entire document exempt. | Blanket exemption rejected; redact identified material and disclose non-identifying data when possible. |
| Whether landlord name/address and property address are disclosable despite lead-related data. | Addresses of property owners and properties are disclosable after redaction of personal data. | Such data could still reveal a child's identity with other information. | Property owner name/address and property address are disclosable; redact personal identifiers. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Jones-Kelley, 118 Ohio St.3d 81 (2008-Ohio-1770) (burden on custodian to prove applicability of an exception)
- State ex rel. O’Shea & Assocs. Co., L.P.A. v. Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth., 131 Ohio St.3d 149 (2012-Ohio-115) (liberal disclosure bias; non-identifying info may be disclosed with redaction)
- State ex rel. Daniels v. Cincinnati, 108 Ohio St.3d 518 (2006-Ohio-1215) (HIPAA-not-to-disclose where notices lack identifying data; required-by-law exception noted)
- National Broadcasting Co. v. Cleveland, 38 Ohio St.3d 79 (1988-Ohio-2) (redaction where applicable; disclose non-exempt information)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996-Ohio-105) (summary judgment burden on movant; genuine issue of material fact)