<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bill Todd: Crappy Lawyer? Or Big Liar?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/</link>
	<description>A Progressive Political Playground</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:38:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48874</link>
		<dc:creator>bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 12:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48874</guid>
		<description>the courts have given wide latitude to public agencies when a public records request is extremely complex.  

in my experience, 30 days is considered a reasonable time for a complex records request such as Bill Todd's.

Relevant caselaw:

66 State ex rel. Consumer News Services, Inc. v. Worthington Board of Education (2002), 97 Ohio St.3d 58, 2002 Ohio 5311 (Promptness is to be
determined based of the facts and circumstances of the case.); see State ex rel. Wadd v. City of Cleveland (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 50, 1998 Ohio
444, 689 N.E.2d 25.
67 State ex rel. Taxpayers Coalition v. City of Lakewood (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 385, 1999 Ohio 114, 715 N.E.2d 179 (seven days for attorney to
review documents is appropriate); State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. Hutson (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 619, 623, 640 N.E.2d 174, 178.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the courts have given wide latitude to public agencies when a public records request is extremely complex.  </p>
<p>in my experience, 30 days is considered a reasonable time for a complex records request such as Bill Todd&#8217;s.</p>
<p>Relevant caselaw:</p>
<p>66 State ex rel. Consumer News Services, Inc. v. Worthington Board of Education (2002), 97 Ohio St.3d 58, 2002 Ohio 5311 (Promptness is to be<br />
determined based of the facts and circumstances of the case.); see State ex rel. Wadd v. City of Cleveland (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 50, 1998 Ohio<br />
444, 689 N.E.2d 25.<br />
67 State ex rel. Taxpayers Coalition v. City of Lakewood (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 385, 1999 Ohio 114, 715 N.E.2d 179 (seven days for attorney to<br />
review documents is appropriate); State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. Hutson (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 619, 623, 640 N.E.2d 174, 178.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48760</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 20:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48760</guid>
		<description>Does the ORC really allow 30 days to fulfill a public records request?

I had thought it only said "a reasonable time," which the courts have since interpreted to mean 14 days at the most.

It's still not been that long, but I'd bet that the request could have been satisfied by now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does the ORC really allow 30 days to fulfill a public records request?</p>
<p>I had thought it only said &#8220;a reasonable time,&#8221; which the courts have since interpreted to mean 14 days at the most.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s still not been that long, but I&#8217;d bet that the request could have been satisfied by now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48739</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 17:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48739</guid>
		<description>To answer the question posed by the title of this entry... both?

That is one tiny head, BTW.  I'm surprised he can find shirts that fit properly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To answer the question posed by the title of this entry&#8230; both?</p>
<p>That is one tiny head, BTW.  I&#8217;m surprised he can find shirts that fit properly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph</title>
		<link>http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48731</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 17:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plunderbund.com/2007/05/31/bill-todd-crappy-lawyer-or-big-liar/#comment-48731</guid>
		<description>note: I didn't edit that picture.   His head REALLY is that small.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>note: I didn&#8217;t edit that picture.   His head REALLY is that small.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
