Three Business Days Means Three Business Days
West Geauga told Brian Ames it was standing by its response to his public-records request. Ames sued the next day, itching to let the court settle the disagreement. He was still too early.
The school board had received his presuit complaint on Monday, April 28, 2025, after he challenged redactions the board had made to a check register before production. The board reaffirmed its response on Tuesday, and Ames filed Wednesday.
| Day | Count and event |
|---|---|
| Monday, Apr 28 | Receipt of presuit complaint. Excluded from the count. |
| Tuesday, Apr 29 | Day 1. Board reaffirms its response. |
| Wednesday, Apr 30 | Day 2. Ames files prematurely. |
| Thursday, May 1 | Day 3. Cure period continues through today. |
| Friday, May 2 | Earliest filing date. Three business days have passed. |
Under R.C. 149.43(C)(1), however, the board had three business days after receipt to cure or otherwise address his complaint. The day the board received the presuit complaint didn’t count, so Ames was supposed to wait through Thursday and could file Friday. So, the court dismissed the case. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed dismissal without deciding whether the redactions were proper. State ex rel. Ames v. West Geauga, 2026-Ohio-4076, ¶¶ 6–8, 18–19.
The part of this decision that struck me is the fact that even though the board confirmed to Ames that it wasn't changing its position before the three-day period was over, Ames still could not file until the three business days had passed. I read that as leaving room for an office to reconsider during the remaining time, rather than treating its first response to the complaint as the end of the discussion.
You may have already told the requester that the denial stands when counsel notices a problem with a redaction, or an employee finds a record that was missed. I suggest correcting the response at that point, instead of quietly sweeping it under the rug. There’s no need to defend the earlier answer just because it has already gone out, and producing the record before suit may avoid a dispute that would otherwise cost considerably more to resolve.
The board didn’t change its mind in Ames, so the Court didn’t need to decide how a change in position before the end of the cure period would change the outcome of the case. But the requester’s obligation to wait gives the office a chance to do more than repeat its denial. If a second review turns up a mistake, use that chance to fix it.