In the case of State ex rel. Curtis v. Turner, 2023-Ohio-1814, an appellate court held that the official did not have to produce public records when the requester did not show that the official had the records.
In this case, the requester argued that the official had failed to provide several requested public records including, but not limited to, an arrest warrant, a DNA search warrant, and a cell phone search warrant. In response, the official argued that the official provided all requested public records in the official’s possession and the official did not have possession of the other requested public records. The appellate court agreed with the official.
In support of its decision in favor of the official, the appellate court explained that the requester failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that the official was the custodian of the public records in dispute.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.