The STATE EX REL. CORDELL v. PADEN, Sheriff., 128 N.E.3d 179

Relator LaDonna Cordell requested records (Aug 9, 2017) from Guernsey County Sheriff Jeffrey Paden relating to State v. Bates (07 CR 117), including forensic test results, scientists’ notes/reports, investigative work product, and witness statements.
The sheriff mailed an incident report (responsive to one category) but did not provide records or a written response addressing the other requested categories.
Cordell sent a second request by certified mail (Aug 18, 2017); the sheriff did not respond to that request for nearly three months.
Cordell filed an original action for a writ of mandamus (Oct 5, 2017). While the action was pending, the county prosecutor provided Bates’s file and the same incident report and stated that forensic testing had been done by other agencies and some documents were not disclosable.
The sheriff consistently maintained his office had no additional records and that other agencies likely held any forensic-test results.

Issue	Cordell’s Argument	Paden’s Argument	Held
Existence/custody of requested records	Records (tests, notes, witness statements, reports) must exist because they were needed to arrest/convict Bates	Sheriff’s office did not conduct tests and does not have those records; other agencies likely have them	Relator failed to prove records exist or are in sheriff’s custody; mandamus to compel production denied
Duty to respond and completeness of response	Sheriff failed to provide all responsive records and did not clearly state what he had or withheld	Sheriff provided the incident report and later the Bates file via prosecutor; other records not in his custody or are exempt	Sheriff’s August response was incomplete; failure to timely and fully respond violated R.C. 149.43(B)
Unreasonable delay in responding	Delay in responding to the certified request and to the mandamus petition was unreasonable	No persuasive explanation provided for the delay	Court finds unreasonable delay (second response nearly 3 months later; 43 days after filing mandamus) and awards statutory damages
Statutory damages and costs	Requests award of statutory damages and court costs	Sheriff offers no explanation justifying reduction or waiver of damages; contends exemptions/other custody	Court awards maximum statutory damages ($1,000) but denies court costs because mandamus relief is denied

State ex rel. Physicians Commt. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 108 Ohio St.3d 288 (2006) (mandamus is proper remedy to enforce Public Records Act)
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton Cty., 75 Ohio St.3d 374 (1996) (Public Records Act construed liberally in favor of disclosure)
State ex rel. Lanham v. Smith, 112 Ohio St.3d 527 (2007) (public office has no duty to create or provide access to nonexistent records)
State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343 (2014) (relator must prove by clear and convincing evidence that requested records exist and are maintained by the public office)
State ex rel. Morgan v. Strickland, 121 Ohio St.3d 600 (2009) (reasonableness of response time depends on all pertinent facts and circumstances)
State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Johnson, 106 Ohio St.3d 160 (2005) (relator bears burden to show response was unreasonably delayed)
State ex rel. DiFranco v. S. Euclid, 138 Ohio St.3d 367 (2014) (statutory damages appropriate after a multi-month delay in responding to a records request)