State ex rel. Frank v. Ohio State Univ. (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 3422

On Feb. 22, 2019, attorney Kevin L. Murphy emailed OSU's public-records office requesting records about Andrew Frank (correspondence with the Clermont County prosecutor and Scott O’Reilly and documents provided by those parties). Murphy did not state he was Frank’s agent or attach a FERPA release to that submission.
OSU’s public-records coordinator acknowledged the request, then on Mar. 19, 2019 denied it citing R.C. 149.43(A)(1)(v) and FERPA, and directed inquiries about student-discipline records to OSU’s Office of Student Life Student Conduct.
Murphy replied that Frank had executed a FERPA release; OSU’s public-records director replied on Apr. 8 that the requested records remained subject to FERPA and again referred Murphy to Student Conduct to explain inspection/review procedures.
Frank filed an original action in mandamus seeking to compel disclosure. The court issued an alternative writ, received briefs and evidence, and considered Frank’s motion to strike portions of OSU’s evidence.
The court concluded OSU’s initial March 19 denial (to the extent it was a denial) was supported by FERPA, and that OSU’s April 8 communication was a referral (not a denial) to the proper office. The writ of mandamus was denied.
The court denied Frank’s motion to strike but ordered, sua sponte, that two OSU affidavits and exhibits L, M, and N be placed under seal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether FERPA bars disclosure of the requested student records	Frank: he executed a valid FERPA waiver so records are disclosable	OSU: request was from a third party with no waiver provided to public-records office; FERPA prohibits release	Court: FERPA can prohibit release; March 19 denial was well founded to the extent it was a denial
Whether OSU’s Apr. 8 response was a denial or a referral to the proper office	Frank: sought relief for nondisclosure	OSU: Apr. 8 merely referred requester to Student Conduct, which handles inspection/review under FERPA	Court: Apr. 8 was a referral, not a denial; OSU responded promptly and fully
Entitlement to statutory damages, attorney fees, or costs under R.C. 149.43	Frank: sought fees/damages for alleged wrongful withholding	OSU: no wrongful withholding because FERPA protections and referral	Court: No award — mandamus denied, so no statutory remedies granted
Whether OSU’s affidavits/exhibits should be stricken or sealed	Frank: move to strike portions of OSU’s evidence because they contain student information protected by FERPA	OSU: opposes striking; evidence submitted in opposition to mandamus	Court: motion to strike denied; court ordered affidavits and exhibits L, M, and N (and M sua sponte) placed under seal

State ex rel. Cleveland Right to Life v. Ohio Controlling Bd., 138 Ohio St.3d 57 (2013) (mandamus standard and public-records act enforcement)
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Pike Cty. Gen. Health Dist., 154 Ohio St.3d 297 (2018) (mandamus appropriate to compel Public Records Act compliance)
State ex rel. Caster v. Columbus, 151 Ohio St.3d 425 (2016) (public-records mandamus principles)
Physicians Commt. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 108 Ohio St.3d 288 (2006) (Public Records Act construed liberally in favor of disclosure)
Gilbert v. Summit Cty., 104 Ohio St.3d 660 (2004) (resolving doubts in favor of disclosure under R.C. 149.43)
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton Cty., 75 Ohio St.3d 374 (1996) (public-records access principles)
State ex rel. ESPN, Inc. v. Ohio State Univ., 132 Ohio St.3d 212 (2012) (FERPA’s application can render records nondisclosable under R.C. 149.43(A)(1)(v))
United States v. Miami Univ., 294 F.3d 797 (6th Cir. 2002) (FERPA conditions federal funding on protection of personally identifiable student information)