Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio denied a writ of mandamus and statutory damages brought by an inmate seeking copies of his prior electronic prison mail. The court found the mandamus claim moot because the public-information officer had already produced the requested records, and deemed the three-month response time reasonable given the high volume of over 50 requests for more than 300 documents submitted by the relator. Consequently, all pending motions were denied, though the Chief Justice dissented in part regarding the denial of statutory damages.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Robinson's mandamus claim was moot because Wesson produced the requested records after the action was filed.
- Whether Wesson had a duty under R.C. 149.43(B) to respond to Robinson's June 2 request, which merely reiterated earlier requests and sought no new records.
- Whether Wesson provided the requested records within a reasonable period under R.C. 149.43(B)(1).
- Whether Robinson was entitled to statutory damages under R.C. 149.43(C)(2).
- Whether Robinson's motions to strike, proceed to judgment, obtain proof of service, and submit additional evidence should be granted.
Holdings
- Robinson's request for a writ of mandamus was moot because Wesson provided all requested records, including the two records Robinson had not expressly acknowledged receiving but later attached and identified as having been provided.
- Wesson had no duty under R.C. 149.43(B) to respond to the June 2 kite because it did not request additional public records and at most reiterated prior requests.
- Wesson's approximately three-month response time was reasonable under the circumstances because he was simultaneously responding to more than 50 requests from Robinson seeking more than 300 documents.
- Robinson was not entitled to statutory damages because Wesson did not fail to comply with an obligation under R.C. 149.43(B); his response time was reasonable.
- The court denied Robinson's motions to strike, motions to proceed to judgment, motion for proof of service, and motion to strike Wesson's opposition, and disregarded untimely arguments and evidence.
Key quotations
“when requested records have been provided to the relator after a mandamus action is filed in a public-records case, the action becomes moot.” (¶ 19)
“What constitutes a reasonable period “depends upon all of the pertinent facts and circumstances,”” (¶ 26)
“We conclude that it was. We therefore hold that Robinson is not entitled to an award of statutory damages.” (¶ 30)
Factual background
Robinson, an inmate at Grafton Correctional Institution, sent seven electronic kites to Wesson seeking copies of prior electronic kites and other public records. Wesson acknowledged the requests within four to seven days and produced the requested records on September 3 and 5, 2024, approximately three months after the requests. During that period, Robinson had submitted more than 50 public-records requests seeking more than 300 documents.
Procedural history
Robinson filed an original mandamus action in June 2024 after submitting seven electronic public-records requests to Wesson. The Supreme Court of Ohio granted an alternative writ, received the parties' evidence and briefs, and denied Robinson's motions, writ request, and statutory-damages request.