In the case Langshaw v. N. Royalton, 2021-Ohio-3394, the special master found that in an action in which a requester was seeking to compel the city to provide communication records, the requester failed to show that the city violated R.C. 149.43(B) and/or that the city’s process for retrieving such communications was irregular or unlawful.
Here, the requester was seeking to compel the city to provide text messages and other communication records in which city officials specifically discussed the requester. When the city provided such documentation, the requester filed a complaint arguing that the requester was denied access to public records in violation of R.C. 149.43(B).
The city argued that all requested records had been disclosed and that the city produced explanation of how they retrieved the text messages and provided a resolution of a problem they encountered.
The special master agreed with the city and recommended to the court that the requested did not offer persuasive evidence to prove that the city’s process for producing such records was irregular or unlawful. As such, the special master held that the requesters speculations were insufficient to prove that there were additional records that the city was required to produce.
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.