About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

73 Ohio St. L.J. Furthermore 1 (2012)

handle is hein.journals/furth73 and id is 1 raw text is: Blueprint for a Loophole: Cincinnati Enquirer v. Cincinnati Board of Education JOHN C. GREINER* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. IN TR OD U CTION .................................................................................. 1 II. THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND THE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS E X C EPTIO N ........................................................................................ 1 III. CINCINNATI ENQUIRER v. CINCINNATI BOARD OF EDUCATION ............. 3 A . The Illegal M eeting ................................................................ 3 B . The Trial Court Action ............................................................ 3 C . The App eal .............................................................................. 5 IV . DEFECTS IN THE HOLDING ............................................................. 6 A. Procedural Defects of the Decision ....................................... 6 B. Substantive Defects of the Decision ....................................... 8 V. THIS RULING CREATES A MAJOR LOOPHOLE FOR PUBLIC BODIES, ALLOWING THEM TO SKIRT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OPEN M EETIN G S A CT ............................................................................... 8 VI. THE ULTIMATE FAILING OF THE CINCINNAT ENQUIRER V. CINCINNA TI BOARD OF EDUcATOa DECISION ................................ 10 I. INTRODUCTION On June 22, 2011, the Ohio Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal in the case of Cincinnati Enquirer v. Cincinnati Board of Education.1 The litigation resulted from a dispute between the Cincinnati Enquirer (Enquirer) and the Cincinnati Board of Education (Board) over a violation of the Ohio Open Meetings Act (Act).2 By denying the Enquirer's appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court let stand the court of appeals decision that created a major loophole for public bodies to avoid the provisions of the Act and expanded an already questionable decision far beyond its proper scope. II. THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND THE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS EXCEPTION The Act serves as a critical check on Ohio's public bodies by requiring the vast majority of all official business to occur in plain sight. As the preamble to the Act states, the law shall be liberally construed to require public officials to * Partner, Graydon Head & Ritchey LLP, Cincinnati, OH; served as counsel for the Cincinnati Enquirer in the litigation discussed in this Article. 1949 N.E.2d 1032 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011), appeal denied, 949 N.E.2d 44 (Ohio 2011) (table decision). 2 OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 121.22 (LexisNexis 2007).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most