State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Morrow County Prosecutor's Office

105 Ohio St. 3d 172 (Ohio 2005) · Supreme Court of Ohio · February 24, 2005

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court held that a 911 tape was a public record subject to immediate release under the Ohio Public Records Act. Because the requesting party sought a copy in the same audiotape medium maintained by the prosecutor’s office, the respondents were required to provide that copy rather than merely permit inspection or offer a transcription. The court granted an immediate peremptory writ of mandamus and awarded attorney fees.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Moyer, C.J.; Resnick, J.; Lundberg Stratton, J.; O'Connor, J.; O'Donnell, J.; Lanzinger, J.; Pfeifer, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
February 24, 2005
Procedural posture
The Dispatch Printing Company sought a peremptory writ of mandamus under the Ohio Public Records Act to compel production of a copy of a 911 audiotape. After respondents admitted the pertinent facts, the Supreme Court of Ohio considered under S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) whether dismissal, an alternative writ, or a peremptory writ was appropriate.
Standard of review
Under S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5), a peremptory writ of mandamus is appropriate when the pertinent facts are uncontroverted and it appears beyond doubt that the relator is entitled to the requested writ.
Precedential value
Published Ohio Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Morrow County Prosecutor's Office, Charles S. Howland, Morrow County
Disposition
writ_granted

Topics

civil procedurestatutory interpretationattorney feesremediesadministrative law

Practice areas

Ohio public records lawmandamusadministrative lawstatutory interpretationattorney fees

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Dispatch was entitled to a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling respondents to provide a copy of the 911 tape.
  2. Whether the Ohio Public Records Act required respondents to provide the tape in the same medium in which it was maintained rather than merely permitting inspection or offering a transcription.
  3. Whether Dispatch was entitled to attorney fees.

Holdings

  1. A peremptory writ is appropriate because the pertinent facts were uncontroverted and Dispatch was clearly entitled to the requested relief.
  2. Dispatch was entitled to a copy of the 911 tape because 911 tapes are public records not exempt from disclosure and must be immediately released upon request.
  3. Respondents were required to provide Dispatch with a copy of the 911 tape in the same audiotape format in which respondents maintained it; allowing Dispatch to listen to the tape or offering a transcription did not satisfy the statutory duty.
  4. Dispatch was entitled to attorney fees because it established a sufficient public benefit and respondents failed to comply with the records request for invalid reasons.

Key quotations

Nine-one-one tapes in general * * * are public records which are not exempt from disclosure and must be immediately released upon request. (105 Ohio St. 3d at 173)
Because R.C. 149.43(B)(2) is unambiguous, we must apply it as written. (105 Ohio St. 3d at 174)
Similarly, the Dispatch is entitled to a copy of the 911 tape at cost. (105 Ohio St. 3d at 174)

Factual background

Dispatch requested a copy of a 911 tape relating to two homicides. The Morrow County prosecuting attorney permitted Dispatch to listen to the recording and offered to transcribe it, but refused to provide a copy or allow Dispatch to record the tape. Respondents admitted that they kept the record in audiotape format and had refused Dispatch's request for a copy in that format.

Procedural history

In January 2005, Dispatch requested a copy of a 911 tape from the Morrow County prosecuting attorney. The prosecutor allowed Dispatch to listen to the tape and offered to transcribe it, but refused to provide or permit copying of the tape. Dispatch filed an original mandamus action, respondents answered admitting the relevant facts, and the Supreme Court issued an immediate peremptory writ and awarded attorney fees.

Remand instructions

No remand was ordered. The court directed Dispatch's counsel to submit a bill and supporting documentation for attorney fees in accordance with DR 2-106.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…