Court Opinion

ID: 9882985
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-05 22:22:50.88633+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:20.549053
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Seiverth v. Perrysburg, 2023-Ohio-2767.]

                              IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO

 JONATHAN DOUGLAS SEIVERTH                          Case No. 2022-00850PQ

         Requester                                  Judge Lisa L. Sadler

         v.                                         JUDGMENT ENTRY

 CITY OF PERRYSBURG

         Respondent

        {¶1} In this public-records case, Requester Jonathan Douglas Seiverth seeks
certain records from Respondent City of Perrysburg. After mediation failed to successfully
resolve all disputed issues between the parties, Respondent moved to dismiss
Requester’s complaint for failure to state a claim.
        {¶2} Pursuant to R.C. 2743.75(F)(1), a Special Master has issued a Report and
Recommendation (R&R).               The Special Master recommends denying Respondent’s
motion to dismiss. (R&R, 3-4). The Special Master further recommends:
        - Respondent be ordered to produce to Requester unredacted copies of all
        records that were redacted based on attorney-client privilege and/or R.C.
        3707.17 [sic].
        - Respondent be ordered to produce to Requester all records filed with the
        court for in camera review.
        - Requester recover his filing fee and the costs he incurred in connection
        with this case.
(R&R, 11.)
        {¶3} Neither party has filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation,
as permitted by R.C. 2743.75(F)(2). Pursuant to R.C. 2743.75(F)(2), if neither party
timely objects, then this Court “shall promptly issue a final order adopting the report and
recommendation, unless it determines that there is an error of law or other defect evident
on the face of the report and recommendation.” Upon independent review, the Court finds
Case No. 2022-00850PQ                        -2-                       JUDGMENT ENTRY

typographical errors referencing R.C. 3707.17, instead of R.C. 3701.17, in the Report and
Recommendation. See R&R at 1, 11. The Court further finds, however, that the Special
Master has correctly applied R.C. 3701.17. The Court also finds no error of law or other
defect evident on the face of the Report and Recommendation. The Court adopts the
Report and Recommendation, excepting the typographical errors.
         {¶4} In accordance with the Special Master’s recommendations, the Court
DENIES Respondent City of Perrysburg’s 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss Requester’s
Complaint (filed on June 14, 2023); the Court ORDERS Respondent to produce to
Requester unredacted copies of all records that were redacted based on attorney-client
privilege or R.C. 3701.17, or both, and all records filed with the Court for in camera review;
and the Court ORDERS that Requester is entitled to recover from Respondent the
amount of the filing fee of twenty-five dollars and any other costs associated with the
action that are incurred by Requester, excepting attorney fees. Court costs are assessed
to Respondent. The Clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date
of entry upon the journal.

                                            LISA L. SADLER
                                            Judge

Filed July 18, 2023
Sent to S.C. Reporter 8/10/23