State ex rel. Morgan v. City of New Lexington

Summary

Victoria Morgan brought an original mandamus action under Ohio’s Public Records Act to compel the City of New Lexington to provide records supporting her discharge from employment. The Supreme Court of Ohio held that her request was sufficiently specific, that the requested routine employment records were not confidential law-enforcement investigatory records, and that neither the clean-hands doctrine nor the availability of other remedies barred mandamus. The court granted the writ but denied attorney fees.

Holdings

1. Morgan's request was sufficiently specific to invoke the Public Records Act because it sought records supporting the city's identified disciplinary charges and identified particular categories of records; a request need not specify each record's author and date when the public office knows which records are sought.
2. The lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law is not a prerequisite to mandamus relief in a public-records case, and the availability of civil discovery or another remedy does not preclude a Public Records Act mandamus action.
3. The requested records were not exempt confidential law-enforcement investigatory records because they were created in the routine course of public employment before the investigations began and related to employment matters rather than directly to law enforcement.
4. Morgan's alleged misconduct did not bar her Public Records Act mandamus claim under the clean-hands doctrine.
5. The city had not established that the requested personnel records and policies did not exist, although a public office has no duty to create new documents to satisfy a records request.
6. Morgan was not entitled to attorney fees because she failed to establish a sufficient public benefit; the requested records primarily benefited her in a potential civil action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Morgan's public-records request identified the requested records with sufficient clarity under R.C. 149.43.
2. Whether the availability of alternative discovery or other legal remedies barred Morgan's mandamus action.
3. Whether the requested employment and disciplinary records were confidential law-enforcement investigatory records exempt from disclosure.
4. Whether Morgan's alleged misconduct or lack of clean hands barred her request for mandamus relief.
5. Whether the city was required to provide personnel records and policies that it claimed did not exist in the requested form.
6. Whether Morgan was entitled to attorney fees.

Disposition

writ_granted