State ex rel. Kesterson v. Kent State Univ.
123 N.E.3d 887
Ohio2018Background
- Relator Kesterson requested (Feb 2, 2016) personnel files for five employees and all Title IX/sexual-assault training materials provided to the softball team and student-athlete reviews of a coach through Aug 2015.
- Kent State acknowledged the request promptly and produced over 700 pages by Feb 25, 2016, but produced additional PowerPoint training materials on Oct 28 and Nov 9, 2016.
- The later materials were campus-wide student-orientation and sexual-violence training slides that Kent State created and did not redact.
- Kesterson filed a mandamus action on Apr 21, 2016 seeking enforcement, statutory damages, costs, and attorney fees under Ohio’s Public Records Act, R.C. 149.43.
- The court found Kent State failed to produce all responsive records until Nov 9, 2016 (after the mandamus filing) but ultimately produced the records, rendering the writ moot as to compelled production.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of production under R.C. 149.43(B) | Kesterson: production incomplete; additional responsive records produced months later — untimely | Kent State: produced over 700 pages within ~3 weeks; later slides were nonresponsive or courtesy | Court: Kent State did not complete response until Nov 9, 2016; initial Feb production not untimely but later production was belated |
| Whether records produced Oct/Nov 2016 were "public records" responsive to request | Kesterson: slides were public records documenting university functions and responsive to her broader request | Kent State: materials not responsive to request (or provided as courtesy) | Court: slides were public records and responsive; Kent State did not show they were unavailable in Feb 2016 |
| Availability of mandamus relief after full production | Kesterson: sought writ to compel compliance | Kent State: had produced records; writ unnecessary | Court: writ denied as moot because records were ultimately produced |
| Statutory damages, costs, and attorney fees under R.C. 149.43 | Kesterson: sought $100/day statutory damages, court costs, and mandatory attorney fees | Kent State: argued no violation or reduction of damages/fees under statutory exceptions | Court: awarded maximum statutory damages ($1,000) and attorney fees; denied court costs because writ not issued ordering compliance |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Deters, 148 Ohio St.3d 595, 2016-Ohio-8195, 71 N.E.3d 1076 (statutory damages available when records not provided promptly; reasonableness depends on circumstances)
- State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. Hutson, 70 Ohio St.3d 619, 1994, 640 N.E.2d 174 (public office may examine and redact records before inspection)
- State ex rel. Shaughnessy v. Cleveland, 149 Ohio St.3d 612, 2016-Ohio-8447, 76 N.E.3d 1171 (24‑day production delay not unreasonable when office took prompt, comprehensive steps)
- State ex rel. Lanham v. Smith, 112 Ohio St.3d 527, 2007-Ohio-609, 861 N.E.2d 530 (no duty to create records that do not exist)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Sage, 142 Ohio St.3d 392, 2015-Ohio-974, 31 N.E.3d 616 (statutory damages accrual principles and analysis)
- State ex rel. Carr v. London Corr. Inst., 144 Ohio St.3d 211, 2015-Ohio-2363, 41 N.E.3d 1203 (statutory framework for reducing or denying damages under R.C. 149.43)