SETTLEMENT IN THE POWELL CROSSING CASE BY,
BETWEEN, OR AMONG ANY ONE OR MORE OF THE CITY OF POWELL, THE
CENTRAL OHIO RISK MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ('CORMA'), AND GAIG (OR
SUCH PERSONS' EMPLOYEES, ATTORNEYS, OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVES OR
AGENTS). THE COURT OF CLAIMS FURTHER ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE
REQUESTER'S PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST FOR SUCH CORRESPONDENCE IS
'IMPROPERLY AMBIGUOUS AND OVERLY BROAD, DOES NOT REASONABLY
IDENTITY THE RECORDS SOUGHT, AND IS THEREFORE UNENFORCEABLE
UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT' WHERE, AS HERE, THE CITY CAN
REASONABLY IDENTIFY THE PUBLIC RECORDS THAT THE REQUESTER HAS
REQUESTED.
{¶16} "V. THE COURT OF CLAIMS ERRED BY FAILING TO FIND THAT THE
CITY VIOLATED ITS DUTY UNDER R.C. 149.43(B)(2) AND (B)(3) TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION AS TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE CITY KEEPS, MAINTAINS, AND
ACCESSES ITS RECORDS, AS IT IS REQUIRED TO DO UPON CLAIMING THAT THE
REQUESTER'S REQUESTS ARE AMBIGUOUS AND OVERLY BROAD. THE COURT
OF CLAIMS FURTHER ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE CITY DID NOT VIOLATE ITS
DUTIES TO REQUESTER UNDER R.C. 149.43(B) AND FINDING THAT 'THE CITY HAS
NO OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE TO [EBERSOLE'S] OVERBROAD AND
AMBIGUOUS PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS[.].' THE COURT OF CLAIMS FURTHER
ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY FINDING THAT 'THE CITY DID NOT Delaware County, Case No. 2018 CAI 12 0098 8
INITIALLY DENY EBERSOLE'S REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS' FOR
CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING POWELL CROSSING. STILL FURTHER, THE
COURT OF CLAIMS ERRED BY FAILING TO REMEDY THE CITY'S VIOLATION OF
R.C. 149.43(B) BY ORDERING THE DISCLOSURE OF ALL REQUESTED PUBLIC
RECORDS.
{¶17} "VI. THE COURT OF CLAIMS ERRED BY DENYING THE REQUESTER'S
CLAIM FOR THE PRODUCTION OF RECORDS PURSUANT TO R.C. 149.43(B) AND
R.C. 2743.75 FOR THE FIRST NOTICE OF LOSS ('FNOL') FORM SUBMITTED TO
GAIG ON THE CITY'S BEHALF TO CLAIM INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THE
POWELL CROSSING LITIGATION. THE COURT OF CLAIMS FURTHER ERRED BY
FINDING THAT SUCH FNOL IS NOT A 'PUBLIC RECORD' WITHIN THE MEANING OF
R.C. 149.43(A) AND 149.011(G), WHERE: (A) THE FNOL IS IN THE POSSESSION OF
PERSONS ACTING ON THE CITY'S BEHALF; AND (B) THE FNOL WAS SUBMITTED
TO GAIG ON THE CITY'S BEHALF TO CLAIM INSURANCE COVERAGE AND
DOCUMENTS THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING SUCH CLAIM."
I.
{¶18} In his First Assignment of Error, appellant essentially contends the Court of
Claims applied an incorrect burden of proof in the proceedings below. We disagree.
{¶19} R.C. 2743.75(A) states in pertinent part as follows: "In order to provide for
an expeditious and economical procedure that attempts to resolve disputes alleging a
denial of access to public records in violation of division (B) of section 149.43 of the
Revised Code, except for a court that hears a mandamus action pursuant to that section, Delaware County, Case No. 2018 CAI 12 0098 9
the court of claims shall be the sole and exclusive authority in this state that adjudicates
or resolves complaints based on alleged violations of that section. ***."
{¶20} As this Court has previously recognized, R.C. 2743.75 does not define the
burden