Legal Opinion

Barton v. Shupe

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 6, 1988No. 87-1900PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Per curiam

In his motion for summary judgment, respondent argues that the report sought is a trial preparation record under the exceptions contained in R.C. 149.43(A) and therefore not a public record. We disagree. R.C. 149.43 provides in part:

“(A) As used in this section:
“(1) ‘Public record’ means any record that is kept by any public office, including * * * [a] city * * * except * * * trial preparation records * * *. <<* * *
“(4) ‘Trial preparation record’ means any record that contains information that is specifically compiled in reasonable anticipation of, or in defense of, a civil or criminal action…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dayton Newspapers, Inc. v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Ohio Fifth District Court of AppealsOhio Supreme Court · 1983

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. James G. Jackson v. City of Columbus, Gregory Lashutka, Thomas W. Rice, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  2. State ex rel. National Broadcasting Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State ex rel. Bush v. SpurlockOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Mazzaro v. FergusonOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State, Ex Rel. Zauderer v. JosephOhio Court of Appeals · 1989

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API