2021 Ohio 3624
Ohio2021Background
- Relator Mark Griffin Sr., an inmate at Toledo Correctional Institution (TCI), requested “names only” of five TCI inmates allegedly murdered by other inmates while under custody between 2012–2014.
- Griffin asserted that murders are documented by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) and that incident reports would contain those names.
- Respondent Sonrisa Sehlmeyer, TCI’s records custodian, replied that no preexisting list of those names exists and that a record would have to be created to supply that information.
- Griffin filed for a writ of mandamus to compel production; the court issued an alternative writ and later considered submitted evidence and briefs.
- The majority denied the writ, holding Griffin requested creation of a new record (an improper request under Ohio’s Public Records Act); a dissent argued the custodian should redact existing incident reports to disclose names only.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the records custodian must produce a list of the five names requested | Griffin: Names exist in DRC/TCI incident reports and should be provided | Sehlmeyer: No existing list; producing it would require creating a new record/search | Majority: Denied — request would require creating a new record; mandamus not warranted |
| Whether custodian must redact existing incident reports to disclose names only | Griffin: Custodian can and should review incident reports and redact everything except the names | Sehlmeyer: Did not concede duty to create or compile list; maintained no existing responsive record in requested form | Dissent: Would have granted writ and required production of redacted incident reports showing names only |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Physicians Comm. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 843 N.E.2d 174 (Ohio 2006) (mandamus is proper remedy to enforce R.C. 149.43)
- State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 6 N.E.3d 1170 (Ohio 2014) (requestor must show requested record exists to obtain mandamus)
- State ex rel. Lanham v. Smith, 861 N.E.2d 530 (Ohio 2007) (custodian has no duty to create nonexistent records)
- State ex rel. Morgan v. New Lexington, 857 N.E.2d 1208 (Ohio 2006) (requests for information or searches creating new records are improper under R.C. 149.43)
- Rhodes v. New Philadelphia, 951 N.E.2d 782 (Ohio 2011) (public-records responses are governed by R.C. 149.43(B))