COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 70409 : ACCELERATED DOCKET HENRY J. FANT : : : JOURNAL ENTRY Plaintiff-Appellant : : and v. : : OPINION GREATER CLEVELAND REGIONAL : TRANSIT AUTHORITY : : PER CURIAM Defendant-Appellee : : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 12, 1996 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil appeal from Common Pleas Court Case No. CV-257045 JUDGMENT: Affirmed. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: __________________________ APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellant: For Defendant-Appellee: HENRY J. FANT, pro se JUAN E. ADORNO, ESQ. P.O. Box 14833 Associate General Counsel Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Regional Transit Authority 615 West Superior Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44113 - 2 - PER CURIAM: This matter came to be heard upon the accelerated calendar of the court pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Local R. 25, which eliminates delay and expense and allows the statement of reasons for the court's decision to be in brief and conclusionary form. Plaintiff-appellant, Henry J. Fant, pro se, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion for attorney's fees. On appeal, plaintiff raises one assignment of error, which states as follows: THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY FAILING TO FIND THE DEFENDANT ACTED IN BAD FAITH, OR VEXATIOUSLY, WANTONLY OR FOR OPPRESSIVE REASONS. Plaintiff argues he is entitled to attorney fees for the personal time he invested when pro se he sued defendant for refusing to provide the public records requested. Plaintiff's assignment lacks merit. It is well settled that in Ohio, pro se litigants are not entitled to attorney fees. State ex rel. Thomas v. Ohio State Univ. (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 245, 251; State ex rel. Fant v. Mengel (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 197; Fant v. Bd. of Trustees, Regional Transit Auth. (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 72. Plaintiff's success in obtaining the public records he sought must be its own reward. David did not receive attorney fees for confronting Goliath. Judgment affirmed. - 3 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. DAVID T. MATIA, PRESIDING JUDGE DIANE KARPINSKI, JUDGE TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, JUDGE N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the .