Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Nelson v. Fuerst

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1993No. 91-2099PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue presented for our review is: Did the court of appeals err in finding that respondents had a duty to mail public records on request? For the reasons that follow, we hold that R.C. 149.43 does not require custodians to mail either copies of public records or the records themselves. Accordingly, we reverse.

Respondents do not dispute that the records Nelson seeks are subject to public disclosure under R.C. 149.43(B). They object only to the court’s procedure for enforcing this statute. Respondents contend that this procedure is contrary to R.C. 149.351(A), which prohibits the removal or…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Fenley v. Ohio Historical SocietyOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State ex rel. Murr v. ThierryOhio Supreme Court · 1987

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. HutsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. Leonard v. WhiteOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Mayes v. HolmanOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State ex rel. The Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. HutsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State ex rel. Iacovone v. KaminskiOhio Supreme Court · 1998

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