2022 Ohio 3140
Ohio Ct. Cl.2022Background
- Requester Brittany Warchol (Sept. 30, 2021) sought broad records from Washington Local School District re: COVID-19, certifications, school funding (ESSER/ARP ESSER/GEER), HVAC logs, communications (including with governor/health/dept. of education), and alleged medical-authority records.
- Superintendent Kadee Anstadt initially responded that FOIA (federal) does not apply, characterized portions of the request as ambiguous/overbroad, provided district public-records policy, and denied existence of records re: medical degrees/authority.
- District produced some records pre- and post-complaint: HVAC logs (≈70 pages), retention schedule, and thousands of pages of emails responsive to narrowed search terms; Special Master found those portions moot.
- Special Master recommended denial of motion to dismiss based on requester’s initial reliance on FOIA (parties treated request as under Ohio Public Records Act), but found most of the original request ambiguous/overbroad and not enforceable.
- Exception: an embedded, narrowed request for records about amounts/use/stipulations/pending approval of ESSER/ARP ESSER/GEER funds during the relevant period was deemed sufficiently specific and ordered produced.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of FOIA vs Ohio Public Records Act | Warchol initially invoked FOIA and sought relief | Anstadt: FOIA inapplicable to state/local entities; request must be under R.C. 149.43 | Motion to dismiss on FOIA ground denied; matter treated under Ohio PRA because parties proceeded under state law |
| Mootness where records produced | Warchol seeks court-ordered production for all requested records | Anstadt produced HVAC logs, retention schedule, thousands of emails; production moots those claims | Claims moot as to records actually produced; new/mediation requests do not relate back to complaint |
| Ambiguity/overbreadth of request | Warchol contends request sufficiently identified records (three-year span; broad topics) | Anstadt: request would generate >100,000 emails; too vague/discovery-style | Most of the original request held ambiguous/overbroad and unenforceable; requester must reasonably identify records |
| Duty to create/answer or produce non-existent records | Warchol sought explanatory materials, proofs (e.g., "proof masks/vaccines are safe") and evidence of officials prescribing medicine | Anstadt: no duty to create records or answer questions; no records re: superintendent prescribing/receiving compensation; some records protected (student medical) | No obligation to create records or supply answers; burden on requester to show by clear and convincing evidence that non-produced records exist |
| Specificity of embedded ESSER/ARP/GEER funding request | Warchol narrowed request to amounts, stipulations, pending approvals, and prior use | Anstadt acknowledged funds arose in 2020 and did not assert exemptions | Embedded funding request found sufficiently specific and production ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Hogan Lovells U.S., L.L.P. v. Dep’t of Rehab. & Corr., 123 N.E.3d 928 (Ohio 2018) (Public Records Act construed liberally in favor of disclosure)
- State ex rel. Carr v. Akron, 859 N.E.2d 948 (Ohio 2006) (FOIA does not apply to nonfederal entities)
- State ex rel. Zidonis v. Columbus State Cmty. Coll., 976 N.E.2d 861 (Ohio 2012) (requester must identify records with reasonable clarity; overly broad requests can be denied)
- State ex rel. Striker v. Smith, 950 N.E.2d 952 (Ohio 2011) (production of records before decision can render claim moot)
- State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 6 N.E.3d 471 (Ohio 2014) (public office need not produce records it does not possess; affidavit can establish completeness)
- State ex rel. Morgan v. Strickland, 906 N.E.2d 1105 (Ohio 2009) (requests requiring research/compilation or culling through voluminous records are improper public-records requests)