Opinion
E-22-010
04-18-2022
Shameka L. Owens-Moore Relator v. City of Sandusky Respondent
Shameka L. Owens-Moore, pro se.
Shameka L. Owens-Moore, pro se.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
ZMUDA, J.
{¶ 1} This matter is before the court upon relator's, Shameka Owens-Moore, filing of a "complaint and petition for writ of mandamus" on March 10, 2022. In her complaint, relator requests an order from this court compelling the respondent, whom she identifies as "publicrecords@ci.sandusky.oh.us, " to provide her with access to public records that she has previously requested. Relator also seeks an award of money damages as a result of respondent's alleged refusal to provide her with the requested public records.
In the caption of her complaint, relator names the city of Sandusky as the "defendant." Relator then goes on to specifically identify publicrecords@ci.sandusky.oh.us as the party from whom she seeks relief in the body of her complaint.
{¶ 2} "Mandamus is a writ, issued in the name of the state to an inferior tribunal, a corporation, board, or person, commanding the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station." (Emphasis added.) R.C. 2731.01. In order to be entitled to relief in mandamus under R.C. 2731.01, a relator must identify as a respondent a person or entity that fits into at least one of the categories listed in the statute, namely an inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person.
{¶ 3} In this action, relator identifies an email address apparently associated with the city of Sandusky as the respondent. In State ex rel. Jackson v. Lucas County, 6th Dist. Lucas No. L-96-049, 1996 WL 171550, *1 (Mar. 5, 1996), we explained that "political entities such as a state or a county are not encompassed as proper parties against whom a writ of mandamus may issue pursuant to R.C. 2731.01." Because an email address is clearly not a proper party to this mandamus proceeding, and since no other respondents are named by relator, relator is not entitled to the relief prayed for in its petition, and this action is hereby dismissed. The costs of this action are assessed to relator.
{¶ 4} The clerk is directed to serve upon the parties, within three days, a copy of this decision in a manner prescribed by Civ.R. 5(B).
{¶ 5} It is so ordered.
Writ Denied.
Thomas J. Osowik, J., Christine E. Mayle, J., Gene A. Zmuda, J. CONCUR.