holding that because contractual provision designating as confidential applications and resumes for city position could not alter public nature of information, applications and resumes were subject to disclosure under Ohio's Public Records Act
How later courts described this case
- holding that because contractual provision designating as confidential applications and resumes for city position could not alter public nature of information, applications and resumes were subject to disclosure under Ohio's Public Records Act
- finding in a mandamus action that disclosure of resumes and supporting documentation provided to a private consultant required under Ohio law
- “provision of the requested records to the relator in a mandamus action brought under R.C. 149.43 renders the mandamus claim moot”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Douglas, J.,
concurring in judgment only. While the majority continues, in this decision, to rely on a test for awarding attorney fees that has no basis in the statute, the majority nevertheless does reach the proper ultimate conclusion and, accordingly, I concur in the judgment.
Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., concur in the foregoing opinion.