Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Multimedia Inc. v. Snowden

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1995No. 94-2051PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Per curiam

Mandamus is the proper remedy to compel compliance with Ohio’s Public Records Act, R.C. 149.43. State ex rel. Steckman v. Jackson (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 420, 426, 639 N.E.2d 83, 88-89. Snowden concedes that the requested records are “records” for purposes of R.C. 149.43 and that they are held by the city’s Police Division, which is a “public office.” See R.C. 149.011(A) and (G). However, Snowden asserts that the records are excepted from disclosure under R.C. 149.43(A)(2) as “confidential law enforcement investigatory records.”

R.C. 149.43(A)(1) excepts confidential law enforcement…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Steckman v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. National Broadcasting Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. HutsonOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Fox v. Cuyahoga County Hospital SystemOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State ex rel. Thomas v. Ohio State UniversityOhio Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Officer Melissa Kallstrom v. City of ColumbusCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  2. State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton CountyOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Morgan v. City of New LexingtonOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State ex rel. Master v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996

51 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