Skip to main content

Hicks v. Union Twp. Clermont Cty. Bd. of Trustees

OhioNovember 21, 2024No. 2023-0580Cited 1 time
RemandedUnion Twp. Clermont Cty. Bd. of Trustees

Case Details

Judge(s)
Donnelly, J.
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

Public-records requests—R.C. 149.011(G)—Township-newsletter distribution lists come under the jurisdiction of the township and document the organization, functions, procedures, or other activities of the office and are therefore subject to the disclosure requirement of the Public Records Act—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and cause remanded.

What This Ruling Means

# Hicks v. Union Township, Clermont County Board of Trustees ## What Happened Hicks requested public records from Union Township related to their newsletter distribution lists. The township initially refused to release this information. Hicks argued the lists should be public under Ohio's Public Records Act, which requires government agencies to share documents related to their operations. ## What the Court Decided Ohio's Court of Appeals agreed with Hicks and reversed the lower court's decision. The court ruled that township newsletter distribution lists are government documents that must be disclosed to the public. These lists document how the township operates and communicates with residents, making them subject to public-records disclosure requirements. ## Why This Matters for Workers This ruling strengthens public access to government information. It establishes that communication lists and similar internal documents—even from local government offices—cannot be automatically kept secret. For employees and citizens, this means greater transparency about how public agencies function and communicate. It reinforces the principle that government operations should be open to public scrutiny.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

State ex rel. Haydocy v. Ohio Pub. Emps. Retirement Sys.
OhioMay 2026
Defendant Win
State ex rel. AutoZone Stores, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.
OhioNov 2024

Workers' compensation—Temporary-total-disability compensation—R.C. 4123.56—Employee who had already been terminated for violation of employment policies before his shoulder surgery was not "unable to work" as "direct result of an impairment arising from an injury or occupational disease" under plain language of R.C. 4123.56(F) and thus was not entitled to receive temporary-total-disability compensation—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and writ granted.

Defendant Win
Shabazz
OhioNov 2024

Quo warranto—Mandamus—Appellants failed to challenge court of appeals' judgment dismissing their quo warranto claim on basis of laches and therefore waived that argument—Court of appeals' determination that appellants could not establish entitlement to city-council offices or that appellees were unlawfully holding the positions affirmed—Court of appeals' denial of request for writ of mandamus ordering continued payment of salaries and benefits as moot affirmed.

Defendant Win
Read Full OpinionMore Union Twp. Clermont Cty. Bd. of Trustees RulingsAll Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check Your RightsLearn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.