Register v. Cedar Point Police Dep't, 2021-00528PQ

CourtCourt of Claims of Ohio
Writing for the CourtPATRICK E. SHEERAN, Judge.
Citation2022 Ohio 1615
PartiesTHE SANDUSKY REGISTER Requester v. CEDAR POINT POLICE DEPARTMENT Respondent
Docket Number2021-00528PQ
Decision Date06 April 2022

2022-Ohio-1615

THE SANDUSKY REGISTER Requester
v.

CEDAR POINT POLICE DEPARTMENT Respondent

No. 2021-00528PQ

Court of Claims of Ohio

April 6, 2022


JUDGMENT ENTRY

PATRICK E. SHEERAN, Judge.

{¶1} On March 22, 2022, in a Recommendation To Dismiss, a Special Master recommended dismissing Requester's Complaint without prejudice in this public-records case. Neither party has objected to the Special Master's recommendation.[1]

{¶2} In the recommendation, after the Special Master generally summarizes the procedural history of the case, the Special Master states,

[Requester The Sandusky Register] has failed to comply with the Civil Rules regarding proof of service. It has further failed to comply with court orders to obtain counsel. The special master recommends the court dismiss the complaint pursuant to Civ.R. 41 (B)(1) and (3), without prejudice. * * *
Further, the special master is authorized to consider sua sponte whether a complaint should be dismissed for any reason: "Upon the recommendation of the special master the court of claims on its own motion may dismiss the complaint at any time." R.C. 2743.75(D)(2). Based on the
1
same facts and circumstances discussed above, the special master separately recommends the complaint be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to R.C. 2743.75(C)(2). * * *
The above grounds for dismissal dispose of this case in its entirety, and there is thus no need to address any other defense raised in [Cedar
Point Police Departments response. * * *
The special master recommends the court dismiss this action without prejudice. It is recommended that costs be assessed to the requester. * * *

(Footnote omitted.) (Recommendation To Dismiss, 3.)

{¶3} The Court finds that, under the circumstances of this case, the Special Master's recommendation for dismissal of Requester's Complaint without prejudice is well supported.[2] However, the Special Master's reliance on R.C. 2743.75(C)(2), as

2

justification for the recommendation to dismiss without prejudice, is not well taken. R.C. 2743.75(C)(2) provides:

If the allegedly aggrieved person files a complaint under this section and the court of claims determines that the complaint constitutes a case of first impression that involves an issue of substantial public interest, the court shall dismiss the complaint without prejudice and direct the allegedly aggrieved person to commence a mandamus action in the court of appeals with appropriate jurisdiction as provided in [R.C. 149.43(C)(1)]. A review of the Special Master's Recommendation To Dismiss discloses that the Special Master has not concluded that Requester's Complaint constitutes a case of first impression that involves an issue of substantial public interest-a prerequisite for dismissal of a public-records complaint without prejudice under R.C. 2743.75(C). Moreover, the Special Master does not recommend, as R.C.
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT