State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, No. 2013–1159.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM. |
| Citation | 6 N.E.3d 1170,138 Ohio St.3d 343 |
| Parties | The STATE ex rel. GOODEN, Appellant, v. KAGEL, Clerk, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 2013–1159. |
| Decision Date | 13 March 2014 |
138 Ohio St.3d 343
6 N.E.3d 1170
The STATE ex rel. GOODEN, Appellant,
v.
KAGEL, Clerk, Appellee.
No. 2013–1159.
Supreme Court of Ohio.
Submitted Jan. 7, 2013.
Decided March 13, 2014.
[6 N.E.3d 1171]
Martine P. Gooden, pro se.
PER CURIAM.
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus that sought public records. Because appellant, Martine Gooden, failed to file the required supporting documents with his petition and because he failed to prove that the documents he sought were within the possession or control of appellee, Julie Kagel, Marion County Clerk of Courts, we affirm.
{¶ 2} On April 24, 2006, Gooden was ordered to pay restitution to several victims as part of his sentence for a criminal conviction. In his petition for a writ of mandamus, Gooden claimed that despite several requests, Kagel had failed to provide to him certified copies of the victim-loss statement for each victim.
{¶ 3} Gooden also claimed that the sentencing court failed to provide any creditable documentation of the victims' loss, which he asserted was “essential evidence that could sustain the judgment.” He averred that he had repeatedly filed requests with Kagel seeking certified copies of the victim-loss statements from his criminal case but that Kagel had denied access to them.
{¶ 4} The Third District Court of Appeals issued an alternative writ ordering Kagel to respond to the complaint. Kagel responded that she was not and had never been in possession of the documents Gooden was seeking. She also pointed out that Gooden appeared to be challenging the order for restitution, which could have been addressed in the direct appeal of his conviction.
{¶ 5} The court of appeals found that Gooden had not filed the documentation required by R.C. 2969.25 with his petition for a writ of mandamus. The court further found that Gooden had failed to attach any proof of his requests for the victim-loss statements or of Kagel's denial of those requests. The court also noted that Kagel had stated that victim-loss statements were not filed as part of any record related to Gooden in her custody and that Gooden had failed to point to a docket notation or other evidence that such statements had been filed. The court of appeals then held that Gooden had made only an unsubstantiated averment that the documents existed. For these reasons, the court dismissed the petition for a writ of mandamus.
{¶ 6} “Mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ebersole v. City of Powell, Case No. 2018-00478PQ
...rel. McCaffrey v. Mahoning Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 133 Ohio St.3d 139, 2012-Ohio-4246, Page 16¶ 22-26; State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471, ¶ 8. {¶31} Because the parties disagree as to whether documents in the hands of Powell's various agents an......
-
Relator v. Metroparks, No. 100761
...Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (1954), paragraph three of the syllabus. See also State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 1170; State ex rel. McCaffrey v. Mahoning Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 133 Ohio St.3d 139, 2012-Ohio-4246, 976 N.E.2d ......
-
Requester v. Chillicothe City Sch., Case No. 2018-00950PQ
...at ¶ 2.) A public office has no duty to provide records that do not exist, or that it does not possess. State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471, ¶ 5, 8-9. Non-Records {¶23} Chillicothe CS further asserts that wherever bills for McIntosh's legal service......
-
State ex rel. Dissell v. City of Cleveland, 110425
...a record it does not have or create a record that does not exist to satisfy a public records request. State ex rel Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471. {¶ 30} Even if Melnyk's answer established some disputed question of fact about a log of calls, "'[reques......
-
Ebersole v. City of Powell, Case No. 2018-00478PQ
...rel. McCaffrey v. Mahoning Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 133 Ohio St.3d 139, 2012-Ohio-4246, Page 16¶ 22-26; State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471, ¶ 8. {¶31} Because the parties disagree as to whether documents in the hands of Powell's various agents an......
-
Relator v. Metroparks, No. 100761
...Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (1954), paragraph three of the syllabus. See also State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 1170; State ex rel. McCaffrey v. Mahoning Cty. Prosecutor's Office, 133 Ohio St.3d 139, 2012-Ohio-4246, 976 N.E.2d ......
-
Requester v. Chillicothe City Sch., Case No. 2018-00950PQ
...at ¶ 2.) A public office has no duty to provide records that do not exist, or that it does not possess. State ex rel. Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471, ¶ 5, 8-9. Non-Records {¶23} Chillicothe CS further asserts that wherever bills for McIntosh's legal service......
-
State ex rel. Dissell v. City of Cleveland, 110425
...a record it does not have or create a record that does not exist to satisfy a public records request. State ex rel Gooden v. Kagel, 138 Ohio St.3d 343, 2014-Ohio-869, 6 N.E.3d 471. {¶ 30} Even if Melnyk's answer established some disputed question of fact about a log of calls, "'[reques......