Welcome back. This issue, we’re breaking our Supreme Court opinion habit for a Tenth District (Franklin County Court of Appeals) decision that every office using an outside law firm needs to read. The Ohio House of Representatives learned that handing an investigation to outside counsel doesn’t move the file beyond the reach of the Public Records Act, and that even the investigating firm’s draft reports can be public records. Our body camera stop stays in Ohio this time: Oregon, just outside Toledo, where a viral cellphone clip of an officer and three boys selling candy forced a release decision with a juvenile twist. And the Q&A picks up where our Flock webinar left off, because the requests we warned you about have started arriving.
Let’s jump in.
Court Case Review
Forhan v. Ohio House of Representatives, 2026-Ohio-3863 (Tenth District Court of Appeals)
The backstory has some drama. Elliot Forhan was a state representative when House leadership stripped his committee assignments and suspended his Statehouse badge access over what a later report described as a pattern of erratic and aggressive behavior. At the Speaker’s request, the Attorney General appointed the law firm Perez and Morris as special counsel to investigate. The firm interviewed 14 witnesses and produced a report in March 2024.
Then Forhan did something any records officer should notice. He sent a public records request for the full investigation file about himself, including the attorneys’ interview notes and the draft versions of the report. He later added that he wanted the file from a second Perez Morris investigation involving a House staffer’s discrimination complaint. The House produced plenty of documents but drew two lines. No interview notes, because those were the attorneys’ personal notes. And no drafts, because those supposedly weren’t records of the House at all.
The Court of Claims split the baby, and the Tenth District gave that decision a thumbs up. Here’s the lowdown:
