The Ohio Court of Claims has ruled that the City of Cleveland Heights must release specific public records related to an investigation into potential violations of the Open Meetings Act by the city council. This decision affects the transparency of local government actions and the public's right to access government documents.
The case, Kanter v. Cleveland Hts. Law Dept. (Docket No. 2025-01030PQ), involved requester Garry Kanter, who sought access to emails and reports connected to the investigation conducted by the law firm Flannery | Georgalis, LLC. The court's ruling highlights the importance of public records in ensuring accountability in government.
The dispute arose when Kanter submitted a public-records request on October 27, 2025, asking for all emails between former Mayor Kahlil Seren and the law firm involved in the investigation, as well as any reports or analyses they produced. The City Law Department initially provided some records but heavily redacted them, claiming attorney-client privilege and trial preparation exceptions.
After mediation failed to resolve the issue, the case proceeded to a court hearing where both parties submitted evidence and arguments. Kanter contended that the redactions were unjustified and that he was entitled to the full records. The City Law Department maintained that the redactions were necessary to protect privileged communications.
In her report and recommendation, Special Master Sarah Pierce recommended that the court order the City Law Department to produce the requested records, stating, "If records are withheld from release based on a public-records exception, the public office must prove facts clearly establishing the applicability of the exception." The court found that while many redactions were appropriate, some communications with a separate attorney representing city council members were not protected by attorney-client privilege.
Pierce also noted that there was a potential waiver of the attorney-client privilege due to public statements made by the former mayor about the investigation. However, she ultimately concluded that these statements did not constitute a waiver.
The court ruled that the City Law Department must produce records that include emails from the attorney representing the council members and certain communications from a reporter, which were deemed not to fall under the attorney-client privilege. The ruling emphasized that any doubts about the applicability of public-records exceptions should be resolved in favor of disclosure.
In addition to ordering the release of records, the court granted the City Law Department's motion to strike certain evidence submitted by Kanter, which related to a recall election and the termination of a former law director. The court deemed this information sensitive and not publicly available.
The ruling has significant implications for transparency in local government. It reinforces the public's right to access information about government actions, particularly in cases involving potential misconduct by public officials. This decision may encourage other individuals to seek access to public records and hold government entities accountable.
Moving forward, the City of Cleveland Heights must comply with the court's order to release the specified records. This ruling may also set a precedent for future public records requests in Ohio, particularly regarding the balance between attorney-client privilege and the public's right to know.
As for what’s next, the City Law Department has the option to file objections to the court's report and recommendation within seven business days. If they choose to appeal, the case may continue in the court system. However, details about any related cases were not available in the court filing.