Media Law
Book Your Legal Consultation Today
- Constitutional and statutory interpretation
- Prior restraints
- Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
- State public records acts
- Court proceedings/records access
- Newsgathering rights
- Subpoena response protection
- Prepublication review
- Libel defense
- False light/invasion of privacy defense
- Copyright litigation
- Prepublication review
Ford Law’s media law practice centers on defending and advancing First Amendment rights and securing public access to information. Darren represents media clients in complex cases involving government transparency, defamation, and free speech, with a strong commitment to protecting press freedoms. He has litigated significant cases that have set important precedents in Ohio and Kentucky around access to government records and the courts. Darren works with clients on issues such as public records access, defense against defamation claims, and challenges to prior restraints, all with the goal of ensuring that the public’s right to information and media independence are upheld. With deep experience in media law, Darren provides comprehensive, strategic counsel tailored to the unique challenges faced by modern media in a dynamic legal landscape.
Representative Matters
Represented newspaper in a case challenging judicial procedures for sealing criminal court records without statutory notice and hearings. The state supreme court held that courts must follow proper procedural requirements before sealing any records, reinforcing transparency and adherence to public records law.
Represented a newspaper in a case addressing public access to 9-1-1 recordings under the state public records act. The state supreme court ruled that a 9-1-1 callback recording was a public record, rejecting claims of exemptions for trial preparation or confidential law enforcement investigatory records. The decision reinforced transparency in emergency communications and awarded statutory damages and attorney fees for bad faith withholding.
Represented newspaper in a contempt proceeding against a judge who restricted courtroom access for publishing juvenile defendants’ names. The state supreme court upheld the contempt finding, holding that the judge violated an appellate court’s writ by reimposing a publication ban, addressing key issues of prior restraint and access to court proceedings.
Represented newspaper in a mandamus action seeking access to police dash-cam recordings under state public records act. The state supreme court held that dash-cam videos are presumptively public records, subject to case-by-case review for investigative content, clarifying public access rights to law enforcement recordings.
Represented multiple media organizations in a case challenging restrictions on access to juror questionnaires and courtroom proceedings in a high-profile criminal trial. The court ordered the release of redacted juror questionnaires, balancing public access rights with juror privacy and safety, and found that certain media access restrictions exceeded proper limits.
Represented a newspaper in securing journalist access to preliminary autopsy records in a high-profile homicide case. The state supreme court held that Ohio law grants journalists a clear right to review such records, establishing precedent favoring transparency in coroner investigations.
Represented newspaper in challenging a trial court’s orders allowing a police officer to proceed pseudonymously and sealing portions of court records in a defamation lawsuit. The state supreme court granted the writs, holding that the officer’s privacy interests did not outweigh the presumption of open judicial proceedings, reinforcing public access to court records and clarifying standards for litigant anonymity.
Represented a commercial requester in an open records appeal addressing access to electronic property documents under state open records act. The state attorney general held that public agencies cannot deny access based on commercial purpose, clarifying obligations to provide electronic records in their native format and clarifying an important standard for commercial records requests.
Represented national newspaper in a defamation case concerning statements about a high-profile confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial. The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment, holding that the statements were protected opinion.
Represented a newspaper in a public access case before a state supreme court addressing the constitutionality of state’s juvenile record sealing statute. The court clarified the scope of a state constitutional right, balancing juvenile privacy with the public’s right to transparency in judicial proceedings.
Represented a journalist seeking access to courthouse security footage in a case before a state supreme court. The court held that security camera footage was not automatically exempt from disclosure under the security record exemption, establishing important precedent on the scope of the exemption and clarifying the rules governing public records litigation in a special proceeding.
Represented a newspaper in challenging a judge’s sealing of divorce records for a public official. The state supreme court vacated the sealing order, holding that courts must have clear evidence and use the least restrictive means when limiting access, reinforcing the presumption of public access to judicial records.
Represented a newspaper in a federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case seeking records related to a non-prosecution decision by a U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Represented a newspaper in challenging a trial court’s gag order restricting extrajudicial statements in a high-profile criminal case. The appellate court found the gag order unsupported by evidence and emphasized the need for specific findings and consideration of less restrictive alternatives to safeguard fair trial rights. The decision clarified limits on judicial authority to impose gag orders, balancing trial fairness with press freedoms.
Represented a television station in a public records dispute concerning access to emergency action plans for athletic venues. The state attorney general held that the plans were subject to disclosure under the state’s open records act and rejected the improper application of exemptions intended for other emergency plans. The decision clarified transparency requirements for public safety documents and agencies’ procedural duties under open records laws.
Represented a newspaper in a case addressing public access to appellate briefs in proceedings under a statute governing involuntary substance abuse treatment. The state supreme court granted a writ compelling the release of redacted briefs, balancing transparency in judicial proceedings with privacy protections. The decision ensured public scrutiny of significant constitutional issues while safeguarding individuals’ anonymity.
Prior results do not guarantee, warrant, or predict future outcomes. Every legal matter involves unique facts and circumstances. The success or result of any prior representation should not be relied upon as an indication of future success or results. The outcome of any legal matter depends upon a variety of factors, including but not limited to the specific facts and circumstances of each case, the applicable law, the venue, and the parties involved. Any description of prior matters or results is intended only to provide information about the activities and experience of Darren W. Ford and should not be understood as a representation or guarantee of similar results in other cases.