State ex rel. Fluty v. Raiff, 2023 Ohio 3285

Background

November 3, 2020: an incident at a school for children with behavioral needs led to a possible child-abuse report to Broadview Heights Police; McRoberts (school director) later sued Fluty for defamation.
March 31, 2021: Fluty’s counsel requested the initial incident report, narrative supplements, and witness statements via the department’s online portal.
Respondents initially withheld records as confidential law-enforcement investigatory records (CLEIR) on the ground release would likely disclose the identity of an uncharged suspect; counsel asked for redactions instead.
On April 1, 2021, Broadview Heights’s law director emailed a packet of records with McRoberts’s name redacted (and referred to two videos); counsel never received that email; later the redacted packet was provided and, in December 2021 after McRoberts publicly identified herself by suing, unredacted records and videos were produced.
Fluty filed this original-action mandamus seeking production of additional records (a call-screen and a letter), statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs; the Supreme Court denied the writ and all remedies.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Mandamus – production of requested records (incident packet, videos)	Fluty argued she had a clear right to the incident report and related records and that Maurer required unredacted incident reports	Broadview Heights asserted CLEIR exemption applied, produced a redacted packet, and later produced unredacted materials after McRoberts revealed her identity	Writ denied: records produced; no clear-and-convincing proof of any remaining withheld record (no call-screen existed; Ruffa’s letter was not incorporated into the report)
Incorporation by reference (whether Ruffa’s letter was part of requested record)	Fluty contended Ruffa’s letter was incorporated into the department’s report and therefore must be produced	Broadview Heights argued no affirmative incorporation by reference appeared in the incident/offense report	Held: incorporation requires an affirmative reference as in Maurer; Ruffa’s letter was not incorporated, so no compulsion to produce it
Statutory damages under R.C. 149.43(C)(2) for failure to comply with R.C. 149.43(B)	Fluty claimed Broadview Heights failed to make records available and failed to give a legally sufficient denial/authority, warranting statutory damages	Broadview Heights argued it complied (emailed records, relied on CLEIR exception, and had no legal duty to confirm email delivery)	Held: statutory damages denied — (1) Sultaana and later cases permit redaction under the CLEIR/uncharged-suspect exception; (2) no requirement to confirm email delivery; and Broadview Heights’ communications met R.C. 149.43(B)
Attorney fees and court costs (bad faith)	Fluty argued Broadview Heights acted in bad faith by ignoring Maurer and changing policy to withhold names	Broadview Heights maintained it acted in good faith balancing PRA duties and law‑enforcement interests	Held: fees and costs denied—record shows no deceptive intent or conscious wrongdoing; agency acted in good faith

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publ’g Co. v. Maurer, 91 Ohio St.3d 54, 741 N.E.2d 511 (2001) (held routine incident reports were public records and required release without redaction — core holding effectively disavowed here)
State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publ’g Co. v. Akron, 104 Ohio St.3d 399, 819 N.E.2d 1087 (2004) (rejected a per se rule from Maurer; emphasized Maurer was fact‑specific)
State ex rel. Myers v. Meyers, 169 Ohio St.3d 536, 207 N.E.3d 579 (2022) (held information in incident forms may be redacted under other public‑records exceptions)
State ex rel. Steckman v. Jackson, 70 Ohio St.3d 420, 639 N.E.2d 83 (1994) (routine incident reports that contain no exempt information are public records)
State ex rel. Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Assn. v. Mentor, 89 Ohio St.3d 440, 732 N.E.2d 969 (2000) (uncharged‑suspect exemption may apply even when accusations are publicly known)
State ex rel. Horton v. Kilbane, 167 Ohio St.3d 413, 194 N.E.3d 288 (2022) (statutory damages framework under R.C. 149.43(C)(2))
State ex rel. Dehler v. Kelly, 127 Ohio St.3d 309, 939 N.E.2d 828 (2010) (statutory damages should not confer a windfall)
State ex rel. Griffin v. Sehlmeyer, 166 Ohio St.3d 258, 185 N.E.3d 58 (2021) (mandamus will not compel production of a nonexistent record)