From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 11, 1991
62 Ohio St. 3d 197 (Ohio 1991)

Summary

In State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel, 62 Ohio St.3d 197, 580 N.E.2d 1085 (1991), the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals' decision granting respondent's summary judgment motion on the basis that the documents sought by relator did not exist.

Summary of this case from State ex rel. Armatas v. Plain Twp. Bd. of Trs.

Opinion

No. 91-1059

Submitted September 17, 1991 —

Decided December 11, 1991.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 90AP-1314.

In a complaint filed in the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, Henry J. Fant, relator-appellant, sought a writ of mandamus to compel disclosure of public records under R.C. 149.43. Fant sought to obtain from respondents-appellees, Marcia J. Mengel, Clerk, Supreme Court of Ohio, and M.K. Rinehart, the court's Fiscal Officer, copies of an employment application and performance evaluations of Richard R. Gojdics, Deputy Clerk of the Supreme Court. The court of appeals, granting summary judgment for appellees, found that the documents sought by relator do not exist. Respondents had furnished other documents sought by relator, such as Gojdics's resume, the basis on which Gojdics was hired. The court of appeals also denied relator's motion to assess costs against respondents.

The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Henry J. Fant, pro se. Lee I. Fisher, Attorney General, and Shawn H. Nau, for appellees.


Before mandamus can issue, relator must establish he has a clear legal right to the relief requested. State, ex rel. Fant, v. Sykes (1986), 28 Ohio St.3d 90, 28 OBR 185, 502 N.E.2d 597. The Public Records Act, R.C. 149.43, does not require that a public office create new documents to meet a requester's demand. State, ex rel. Scanlon, v. Deters (1989), 45 Ohio St.3d 376, 544 N.E.2d 680. Accordingly, the court of appeals correctly granted appellees' motion for summary judgment.

The court of appeals also correctly denied appellant's motion to assess costs since the complaint lacked any merit. Also, pro se litigants are not entitled to attorney fees under R.C. 149.43. See Fant v. Bd. of Trustees, Regional Transit Auth. (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 72, 552 N.E.2d 639.

The judgment of the court of appeals is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 11, 1991
62 Ohio St. 3d 197 (Ohio 1991)

In State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel, 62 Ohio St.3d 197, 580 N.E.2d 1085 (1991), the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals' decision granting respondent's summary judgment motion on the basis that the documents sought by relator did not exist.

Summary of this case from State ex rel. Armatas v. Plain Twp. Bd. of Trs.
Case details for

State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE, EX REL. FANT, APPELLANT, v. MENGEL, CLERK, ET AL., APPELLEES

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Dec 11, 1991

Citations

62 Ohio St. 3d 197 (Ohio 1991)
580 N.E.2d 1085

Citing Cases

Strothers v. Mayor of East Cleveland

Under Ohio's Public Records Act, there is no duty to provide information or to prepare a record that would…

State v. Rocco

A writ of mandamus will not issue to compel a custodian of public record to provide records that are not in…