State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Wells
| Decision Date | 07 August 1985 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 84-836 |
| Parties | , 18 O.B.R. 437 The STATE, ex rel. DISPATCH PRINTING CO. et al., v. WELLS, Secretary, Logan Civil Service Comm., et al. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Relator Dispatch Printing Company publishes the Columbus Dispatch. Relator Donald Baird is a reporter for the Dispatch and had been covering the Dale Johnston murder case in Hocking County, Ohio.
During Baird's investigation of the Johnston murder case, he sought access to the civil service personnel files of Detective James E. Thompson, who was the principal investigator in the Johnston murder case. In an affidavit filed with this court, Baird represents that, in particular, he wanted to know why Thompson had been demoted from police chief to detective in the Logan, Ohio, police force.
In early February 1984, Baird requested by telephone that respondent John S. Wells, Secretary of the Logan Civil Service Commission, who was in charge of maintaining the employment files of all Logan civil service personnel, provide relator with a copy of or access to Thompson's civil service files.
On March 1, 1984, in response to a written request by respondent Wells, relator Baird appeared before the Logan Civil Service Commission and again requested access to the files.
Finally, on April 4, 1984, relators' counsel made a written request to respondent Wells seeking access to Thompson's personnel files. Throughout this period, respondents 1 have continually refused to afford relators access to the requested files.
Relators brought this amended complaint in mandamus on December 6, 1984 to compel respondents to permit access to Thompson's personnel files.
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, John W. Zeiger, Michael H. Carpenter and Todd S. Swatsler, Columbus, for relators.
Michael Barr, City Atty., Logan, and Schwer, Taggart, Wehler, Emerich & Winks, James F. Peifer and Jerome M. Strozdas, Springfield, for respondents.
It is well-settled law in this state that a writ of mandamus is the appropriate remedy to enforce the public's right to gain access to public records under R.C. 149.43. See State, ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., v. Lesak (1984), 9 Ohio St.3d 1, 457 N.E.2d 821; State, ex rel. Public Employees Retirees, v. PERS (1979), 60 Ohio St.2d 93, 397 N.E.2d 1191 ; State, ex rel. Plain Dealer Pub. Co., v. Krouse (1977), 51 Ohio St.2d 1, 364 N.E.2d 854 . The issue presently before this court is whether the personnel files of Detective Thompson are subject to inspection as a public record under R.C. 149.43.
A "public record" is defined in R.C. 149.43(A)(1) as "any record that is required to be kept by any governmental unit * * *." In accordance with R.C. 124.40(A), municipal civil service commissions are required to perform the same duties with respect to the civil service of the city as are the Director of Administrative Services and the State Personnel Board of Review with respect to the civil service of the state. Hence, pursuant to R.C. 124.09(B) and (C), respondents must keep records of all their proceedings and maintain a complete roster providing the name, address, date of appointment, and various other essential employment information of all persons in the city civil service. All of this information is stipulated to be available for public inspection.
Moreover, when a member of the classified civil service of the city is demoted, that order must be filed with the municipal civil service commission. R.C. 124.34. In Dayton Newspapers v. Dayton (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 107, 341 N.E.2d 576 , syllabus, this court held that "[a] record is 'required to be kept' by a governmental unit, within the meaning of R.C. 149.43 where the unit's keeping of such record is necessary to the unit's execution of its duties and responsibilities."
In light of the above it is clear that the Logan Civil Service Commission would be under a legal duty to maintain pertinent information regarding Detective Thompson's employment, including the order demoting Thompson. Accordingly, this information would constitute a public record under the purview of R.C. 149.43.
Respondents argue that a provision in a collective bargaining agreement between the city of Logan and its municipal police force requiring the city to take all reasonable precautions to ensure the confidentiality of the personnel records of police officers takes precedence over the mandates of R.C. 149.43. This proposition is founded upon a portion of R.C. 4117.10(A) which states:
" * * * Chapter 4117 of the Revised Code prevails over any and all other conflicting laws, resolutions, provisions, present or future, except as otherwise specified in Chapter 4117 of the Revised Code or as otherwise specified by the general Assembly."
This argument is without merit. In the first place, the collective bargaining agreement merely requires the city to take "all reasonable precautions" against disclosure of information contained in personnel files. This wording would not preclude the municipality from disclosure where required by law.
Further, respondents' contention requires...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Tudor, No. 03-68935.
...of statutory construction that a statute should not be interpreted to yield an absurd result."); State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Wells, 18 Ohio St.3d 382, 481 N.E.2d 632, 634 (1985) ("It is an axiom of judicial interpretation that statutes be construed to avoid unreasonable or absurd......
-
83 Hawai'i 378, State of Hawai'i Organization of Police Officers (SHOPO) v. Society of Professional Journalists-University of Hawai'i Chapter
...We are persuaded by the Ohio Supreme Court's interpretation of a functionally identical statute. In State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Wells, 18 Ohio St.3d 382, 481 N.E.2d 632 (1985), the plaintiff-newspaper sought to compel the commissioner of the Logan Civil Service Commission (the co......
-
Narciso v. Powell Police Dep't, Case No. 2018-01195PQ
...ex rel. National Broadcasting Co. v. City of Cleveland, 38 Ohio St.3d 79, 526 N.E.2d 786 (1988); State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Wells, 18 Ohio St.3d 382, 481 N.E.2d 632 (1985). A cautionary note, however, must be raised. When the information contained in a record is heavily intertwi......
-
State v. Robb, 98-1166.
...Bd. of Zoning Appeals (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 238, 240, 667 N.E.2d 365, 367, citing State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Wells (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 382, 384, 18 OBR 437, 439, 481 N.E.2d 632, 634. Nevertheless, we hold that former R.C. 2933.51 did not protect the inmate conversations in thi......