The Ohio Supreme Court ruled on August 26, 2026, in the case of State ex rel. Ames v. Revere Local School District Board of Education, affirming a lower court's decision regarding a public records request made by Brian M. Ames. The ruling has implications for how public records are accessed and the responsibilities of public offices in Ohio.
This case began when Ames, a resident of Ohio, submitted a public records request to the Revere Local School District Board of Education on July 24, 2024. He sought various official records, including meeting minutes and notifications of meetings for the years 2023 and 2024. Ames claimed that the school district did not provide all the records he requested, leading him to file a petition for a writ of mandamus in the Ninth District Court of Appeals.
The dispute centered on whether the school district had fulfilled its obligations under Ohio's Public Records Act, specifically R.C. 149.43. Ames argued that the board had failed to provide adequate records and that the records provided were not in the proper form. The school district countered that it had responded appropriately by directing Ames to its website, where the records could be found.
The Ninth District Court ruled in favor of the school district, stating that Ames's mandamus petition was moot because the board had provided the records he requested. Ames then appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which reviewed the case.
The Ohio Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the Ninth District's judgment. The court stated, "In general, providing the requested records to the relator in a public-records mandamus case renders the mandamus claim moot." The court emphasized that a public office is not required to produce records it does not possess. The justices noted that Ames had failed to demonstrate that the board had withheld any records or that it had not complied with its obligations under the Public Records Act.
The ruling clarifies the responsibilities of public offices when responding to public records requests. It underscores that if a public office provides access to records, the requestor cannot claim a violation of the Public Records Act based solely on the format or form of the records. The court's decision reinforces the idea that public entities can fulfill their obligations by directing requestors to where the information is available, such as a website.
This ruling may have broader implications for individuals seeking public records in Ohio. It sets a precedent that public offices can meet their obligations by providing access to records online, potentially limiting the ability of requestors to challenge the form in which records are maintained. The decision also emphasizes the importance of clearly stating specific requests and ensuring that arguments are raised in a timely manner during legal proceedings.
Looking ahead, it is unclear if Ames will pursue further legal action or if there are related cases pending. The court's ruling does not appear to leave room for an appeal, as it affirmed the lower court's decision. This case serves as a reminder for both public offices and requestors about the importance of understanding the Public Records Act and the processes involved in obtaining public information.