2022 Ohio 3562
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Relator Kimani E. Ware (an inmate) mailed a certified public-records request to the Bureau of Sentence Computation on August 25, 2020; USPS shows delivery on August 31, 2020.
- Ware sent follow-up letters on September 14, 2020 and December 8, 2020; he received no response from the bureau.
- Ware filed a mandamus action on August 23, 2021 seeking an order compelling production and statutory damages under R.C. 149.43.
- The bureau eventually produced the requested personnel files on January 11, 2022, making the production claim moot.
- Ware sought statutory damages ($100 per business day beginning the day he filed mandamus, up to $1,000), court costs, and attorney fees; the magistrate found a 16+ month delay (and 4+ months after filing) unreasonable and awarded the $1,000 maximum statutory damages but denied costs and fees.
Issues
| Issue | Ware's Argument | Bureau's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandamus should compel production | Bureau failed to respond; Ware sought writ to force production | Bureau ultimately produced records; generally denied allegations | Production claim moot because records were provided before decision |
| Whether Ware is entitled to statutory damages under R.C. 149.43(C)(2) for untimely production | Certified-mail request; bureau failed to provide records within a reasonable time; damages should run from mandamus filing | Bureau offered no justification for delay and did not assert any unusual circumstances | Awarded $1,000 (statutory maximum) — delay (16+ months; 4+ months post-filing) was unreasonable |
| Whether Ware is entitled to court costs or attorney fees | Sought court costs and fees associated with mandamus | Bureau did not act in bad faith; fees not available to pro se litigant | No attorney fees (pro se); no court costs because Ware did not show bad faith |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Pressley v. Indus. Comm., 11 Ohio St.2d 141 (1967) (mandamus standard: clear right, clear duty, no adequate remedy)
- State ex rel. Physicians Commt. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 108 Ohio St.3d 288 (2006) (mandamus available to compel public records)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Sage, 142 Ohio St.3d 392 (2015) (requester must prove right to records by clear and convincing evidence)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Jones-Kelley, 118 Ohio St.3d 81 (2008) (public office bears burden to show records are exempt)
- State ex rel. Lanham v. Smith, 112 Ohio St.3d 527 (2007) (writ will not issue when documents do not exist)
- State ex rel. Stuart v. Greene, 161 Ohio St.3d 11 (2020) (reasonableness of response time depends on all facts and circumstances)
- State ex rel. Kesterson v. Kent State Univ., 156 Ohio St.3d 13 (2018) (six-month post-filing delay supported award of statutory damages)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Deters, 148 Ohio St.3d 595 (2016) (discussing factors for determining reasonable response time)
- State ex rel. McDougald v. Greene, 163 Ohio St.3d 471 (2020) (definition of "bad faith" for fee/cost awards)
- State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel, 62 Ohio St.3d 197 (1991) (pro se litigants are not eligible for attorney-fee awards)
- Slater v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co., 174 Ohio St. 148 (1962) (bad-faith definition used in civil context)
- Zoppo v. Homestead Ins. Co., 71 Ohio St.3d 552 (1994) (discussion relating to Slater and bad-faith concepts)