2023 Ohio 621
Ohio Ct. Cl.2023Background
- James Ryan filed three consolidated public-records complaints against the City of Ashtabula (Case Nos. 2022-00660PQ, 2022-00665PQ, 2022-00680PQ) seeking documents, monetary sanctions, and a declaratory statement about a city official’s bond and oath.
- Case 2022-00660PQ challenged three separate requests (two for emails/records; one asking the City to produce "accurate invoices"). The City moved to dismiss under Civ. R. 12(B)(6).
- Cases 2022-00665PQ and 2022-00680PQ sought native-format copies of records the City previously produced in PDF/paper; the City denied the later-format requests and moved to dismiss.
- The special master consolidated the matters, ordered supplemental disclosures, and considered the City’s Civ. R. 12(B)(6) motions and whether the later production rendered claims moot.
- Recommendation: dismiss all claims in 2022-00660PQ for failure to state a claim; dismiss monetary and declaratory relief in 2022-00665PQ and 2022-00680PQ; hold record-production claims in those two cases moot because the City produced the responsive records; assess costs against Ryan.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether Ryan’s first and second requests in 660 identified "identifiable" public records | Ryan contended the email thread and his 2021 emails constituted an identifiable request for responsive emails | City argued requests were overbroad/vague and Ryan had withdrawn/superseded his first request | Court: Requests were not sufficiently identifiable; first request was withdrawn/superseded and both fail as pleaded (dismissed) |
| 2. Whether Ryan’s third request ("accurate invoices") required production | Ryan asked the City to produce invoices reflecting his view of facts | City argued public offices need not create new/nonexistent records | Court: Request sought creation of new records and is facially invalid (dismissed) |
| 3. Availability of monetary damages and the requested declaratory relief about a custodian’s oath/bond in all cases | Ryan sought monetary sanctions and a declaration that the custodian’s responses be certified as diligent, complete, and accurate | City argued monetary relief and the requested declaratory relief are not authorized under R.C. 2743.75 and public-records remedial scheme | Court: Monetary and the requested declaratory relief are unavailable as a matter of law (dismissed) |
| 4. Whether later native-format requests (665 & 680) survive dismissal and whether claims are moot after production | Ryan alleged he requested native-format versions and the City refused | City produced the responsive records (PDF/paper earlier) and swore no other responsive native files exist | Court: Complaints sufficiently plead identifiable requests to survive 12(B)(6) as to production, but the City has produced all responsive records; production renders the record-production claims moot (production claims dismissed as moot; monetary/declaratory claims dismissed) |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Findlay Publishing Co. v. Schroeder, 669 N.E.2d 835 (Ohio 1996) (standard for Civ. R. 12(B)(6) dismissal)
- Welsh-Huggins v. Jefferson Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 170 N.E.3d 768 (Ohio 2020) (requester must allege seeking an identifiable public record under R.C. 2743.75)
- State ex rel. Glasgow v. Jones, 894 N.E.2d 686 (Ohio 2008) (overbroad requests for broad time ranges or categories are invalid)
- State ex rel. Lanham v. Smith, 861 N.E.2d 530 (Ohio 2007) (public offices have no duty to create nonexistent records)
- State ex rel. ESPN, Inc. v. Ohio State Univ., 970 N.E.2d 939 (Ohio 2012) (failure to assist in framing request does not itself create relief if not pleaded)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Dupuis, 781 N.E.2d 163 (Ohio 2002) (provision of requested records generally renders public-records claim moot)
- State ex rel. McCaffrey v. Mahoning Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 976 N.E.2d 877 (Ohio 2012) (burden on requester to show other responsive records exist when respondent says none)