State ex rel. Summers v. Fox (Slip Opinion)
2021 Ohio 2061
| Ohio | 2021Background:
- Relator Charles Summers requested public records from Mercer County Prosecutor Matthew Fox and Sheriff Jeff Grey about his son Christopher’s criminal case (sexual-battery conviction) in Feb–Mar 2017; both offices denied the requests.
- County relied primarily on R.C. 149.43(B)(8) and this court’s decision in Barb to treat third-party requests linked to inmates as subject to judicial approval; Summers denied he was a designee and sued for mandamus.
- During litigation the county also asserted the victim J.K.’s privacy interests; J.K. intervened to press that claim.
- This court (Dec. 10, 2020) granted the writ in part and ordered the county to produce some records but not others; a motion for reconsideration was denied and certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court was later denied.
- Summers then sought court costs, attorney fees (including bad-faith fees), and statutory damages; the county certified compliance after the U.S. Supreme Court denied cert.
Issues:
| Issue | Summers' Argument | County's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Court costs | Mandatory award when writ grants compliance under R.C.149.43 | Does not oppose costs | Award granted (mandatory) |
| Attorney fees — prevailing-party | Fees awarded because Summers prevailed under R.C.149.43(C)(3)(b) | County reasonably relied on Barb and unsettled law; fees discretionary and should be denied | Denied — county’s position was a reasonable, rational stance on unsettled law |
| Attorney fees — bad faith | Partial production after suit shows bad faith; fees under post-filing production theory | Statute disavows presumption of bad faith; no evidence of dishonest intent | Denied — no evidence of bad faith beyond post-filing production |
| Statutory damages ($100/day) | Entitled to statutory damages for failure to timely produce records | Summers did not use authorized delivery methods and May 4 letter lacked specificity | Denied — no proof of hand delivery or certified mail and qualifying written request absent |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Barb v. Cuyahoga Cty. Jury Commr., 128 Ohio St.3d 528 (Ohio 2011) (holds requests tied to incarcerated persons are governed by R.C.149.43(B)(8) and third-party designees fall under that provision)
- State ex rel. Rogers v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 155 Ohio St.3d 545 (Ohio 2018) (sets standards for awarding attorney fees in public-records cases)
- State ex rel. Hedenberg v. N. Cent. Corr. Complex, 162 Ohio St.3d 85 (Ohio 2020) (court costs are mandatory when mandamus compels compliance)
- State ex rel. Doe v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 44 (Ohio 2009) (discusses discretion in awarding attorney fees)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Daniels, 108 Ohio St.3d 518 (Ohio 2006) (denies fees when party takes a rational position on unsettled legal issues)
- State ex rel. McDougald v. Greene, 161 Ohio St.3d 130 (Ohio 2020) (defines bad faith and requires evidence beyond post-filing production)
- State ex rel. Penland v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 158 Ohio St.3d 15 (Ohio 2019) (denies statutory damages where delivery method for request not proved)
- State ex rel. Martin v. Greene, 156 Ohio St.3d 482 (Ohio 2019) (requires clear-and-convincing proof of qualifying delivery for statutory damages)
- State ex rel. Cordell v. Paden, 156 Ohio St.3d 394 (Ohio 2019) (public-records claims governed by the statute in effect when the request was made)