State ex rel. Luken v. Corp. for Findlay Market of Cincinnati
135 Ohio St. 3d 416
Ohio2013Background
- Findlay Market historically owned and operated by the City of Cincinnati and leased to a private nonprofit corporation since 2004; the city funds and oversees the market via a management agreement granting the corporation operational discretion.
- The corporation controls leases with subtenants, including setting rent and collection of payments for market operations.
- Luken sought unredacted lease terms; the city provided records but redacted rent/term data, citing trade-secret protection.
- The corporation claimed it is not a public entity and thus not subject to Ohio Public Records Act, and that redacted terms are trade secrets under R.C. 1333.61(D).
- The court below held the corporation was an entity responsible for public records and that the redacted lease terms are trade secrets exempt from disclosure. The current court affirmed, holding redacted terms are trade secrets and not public records; mootness of whether the corporation is a public entity followed the trade-secret ruling.
- The opinion discusses standards for mandamus relief under the Public Records Act and applies Besser factors to determine trade-secret status of lease terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| whether the corporation is a public-records entity under Krings | Luken argues the corporation is a public-records entity | Corporation contends it is not a public entity under Krings | moot after trade-secret ruling; issue not necessary to decide |
| whether redacted lease terms are trade secrets | redacted terms should be disclosed | terms qualify as trade secrets under RC 1333.61(D) | redacted lease terms are trade secrets and not public records |
| whether mandamus lies to compel disclosure | mandamus should compel disclosure | records are trade secrets and protected | mandamus affirmed to deny disclosure of redacted terms |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Oriana House, Inc. v. Montgomery, 110 Ohio St.3d 456 (2006) (functional equivalence test for public-records status)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Krings, 93 Ohio St.3d 654 (2001) (entity responsible for public records under Krings)
- State ex rel. Besser v. Ohio State Univ., 89 Ohio St.3d 396 (2000) (trade secrets; burden on holder to prove secrecy and economic value)
- State ex rel. Plain Dealer v. Ohio Dept. of Ins., 80 Ohio St.3d 513 (1997) (trade-secret framework and Restatement guidance)
- Water Mgt., Inc. v. Stayanchi, 15 Ohio St.3d 83 (1984) (considerations for secrecy precautions and known information)