Opinion ID: 4566315
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The merits of the public-records claim

Text: {¶ 10} McDougald claims that Sehlmeyer violated her duties under the Public Records Act when she “denied” his public-records request due to his having insufficient funds. But Sehlmeyer did not deny his request. To the contrary, as stated by Sehlmeyer in her affidavit that she submitted as evidence in this case, she informed McDougald that he lacked sufficient funds in his inmate account and 3 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO notified him that he could “re-submit his cash slip when sufficient funds were available.” {¶ 11} Ohio’s Public Records Act does not require a records custodian to provide copies of records free of charge. State ex rel. Call v. Fragale, 104 Ohio St.3d 276, 2004-Ohio-6589, 819 N.E.2d 294, ¶ 6. Instead, the statute “requires only that copies of public records be made available at cost.” Id., citing R.C. 149.43(B)(1). And a public office acts within its discretion when it declines a public-records request based on “a good faith belief that the party requesting the records was unable to pay for copying costs.” State ex rel. Mayrides v. Whitehall, 62 Ohio App.3d 225, 575 N.E.2d 224 (10th Dist.1990), paragraph two of the syllabus. {¶ 12} In her affidavit, Sehlmeyer attests that McDougald had insufficient funds in his inmate account to pay for a copy of the public record he was requesting. According to Sehlmeyer, “[t]he assessment that he had insufficient funds was determined by the institutional cashier’s office.” McDougald alleges that he did have sufficient funds in his inmate account to pay for the public record, pointing to the evidence that he had $1.25 in his account. But McDougald’s account balance is not the only evidence that is necessary for him to meet his burden. He has presented no evidence showing what it would cost for a copy of the use-of-force report. Indeed, he never followed up with Sehlmeyer to inquire how much a copy would cost. Therefore, he has not shown that Sehlmeyer failed to fulfill any of her obligations as a public-records custodian. {¶ 13} Sehlmeyer provided a complete response to McDougald’s publicrecords request. We therefore deny his request for a writ of mandamus.