Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Fostoria Daily Review Co. v. Fostoria Hospital Ass'n

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 1987No. 87-102Published

1DissentDouglas, J.

Because I believe that the majority decision is wrong on the facts, wrong on the law and, in addition, sets a very bad, serious and frightening policy with which I vigorously disagree, I must dissent.

This court has repeatedly recognized mandamus as an appropriate means of securing access to public records under R.C. 149.43. See, e.g., State, ex rel. Harmon, v. Bender (1986), 25 Ohio St. 3d 15, 25 OBR 13, 494 N.E. 2d 1135; State, ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co., v. Wells (1985), 18 Ohio St. 3d 382, 18 OBR 437, 481 N.E. 2d 632; State, ex rel. Plain Dealer Pub. Co., v. Lesak (1984), 9 Ohio St. 3d…

Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State ex rel. Taylor v. GlasserOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. WellsOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Dayton Newspapers, Inc. v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  5. State ex rel. Liberty Mills, Inc. v. LockerOhio Supreme Court · 1986

8 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