|Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas
March 15, 1999
Ms. Mary Keller
Dear Ms. Keller:
You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 122770.
The Texas Department of Insurance (the "department") received a request for complaints and investigations concerning any agent or employee of NYLife Securities, Inc; NYLife Distributors, Inc.; New York Life Insurance Company; and New York Life Insurance and Annuity Corporation, as well as complaints and records from investigations, administrative proceedings, and enforcement actions against the same specified companies. You have released some of the requested information. You raise no exception to public disclosure on behalf of the department. However, because the interests of New York Life Insurance Company ("New York Life") are implicated, you raise section 552.305 of the Government Code.
Pursuant to section 552.305 of the Government Code, this office informed New York Life of the request and of its obligation to claim the exceptions to disclosure it believes apply to the requested information, together with its arguments as to why it believes the claimed exceptions apply. New York Life contends that section 17.61(f) of the Business and Commerce Code makes the requested information confidential, and that privacy, as encompassed by section 552.101 of the Government Code, and section 552.110 of the Government Code except the requested information from public disclosure.
Section 552.110 protects the property interests of third parties by excepting from disclosure two types of information: (1) trade secrets, and (2) commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential by statute or judicial decision. New York Life has made arguments against disclosure under both prongs of section 552.110.
The Texas Supreme Court has adopted the definition of "trade secret" from the Restatement
of Torts, section 757, which holds a "trade secret" to be
any formula, pattern, device or compilation of information which is used in one's business, and which gives him an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it. It may be a formula for a chemical compound, a process of manufacturing, treating or preserving materials, a pattern for a machine or other device, or a list of customers. It differs from other secret information in a business . . . in that it is not simply information as to a single or ephemeral event in the conduct of the business . . . . A trade secret is a process or device for continuous use in the operation of the business. . . . [It may] relate to the sale of goods or to other operations in the business, such as a code for determining discounts, rebates or other concessions in a price list or catalogue, or a list of specialized customers, or a method of bookkeeping or other office management.
Restatement of Torts § 757 cmt. b (1939); see Hyde Corp. v. Huffines, 314 S.W.2d 763, 776 (Tex.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 898 (1958). If a governmental body takes no position with regard to the application of the "trade secrets" branch of section 552.110 to requested information, we accept a private person's claim for exception as valid under that branch if that person establishes a prima facie case for exception and no one submits an argument that rebuts the claim as a matter of law. Open Records Decision No. 552 at 5 (1990).(1)
In Open Records Decision No. 639 (1996), this office announced that it would follow the federal courts' interpretation of exemption 4 to the federal Freedom of Information Act when applying the second prong of section 552.110 for commercial and financial information. In National Parks & Conservation Association v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1974), the court concluded that for information to be excepted under exemption 4 to the Freedom of Information Act, disclosure of the requested information must be likely either to (1) impair the Government's ability to obtain necessary information in the future, or (2) cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained. National Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. Cir. 1974). A business enterprise cannot succeed in a National Parks claim by a mere conclusory assertion of a possibility of commercial harm. Open Records Decision No. 639 at 4 (1996). To prove substantial competitive harm, the party seeking to prevent disclosure must show by specific factual or evidentiary material, not conclusory or generalized allegations, that it actually faces competition and that substantial competitive injury would likely result from disclosure. Id.
After reviewing New York Life's section 552.110 arguments, we agree that the submitted information is commercial information that is excepted from public disclosure under section 552.110. Thus, the department must withhold the submitted information. Because the commercial or financial prong of section 552.110 is dispositive of the matter, we need not address New York Life's trade secret arguments or other arguments against public disclosure.
We are resolving this matter with an informal letter ruling rather than with a published open records decision. This ruling is limited to the particular records at issue under the facts presented to us in this request and should not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other records. If you have questions about this ruling, please contact our office.
Ref: ID# 122770
Enclosure: Submitted documents
cc: Ms. Mary E. Maloney
Mr. Larry F. York
1. The six factors that the Restatement gives as indicia of whether information constitutes a trade
secret are: "(1) the extent to which the information is known outside of [the company]; (2) the extent to
which it is known by employees and other involved in [the company's] business; (3) the extent of
measures taken by [the company] to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the information
to [the company] and [its] competitors; (5) the amount of effort or money expended by [the company]
in developing the information; (6) the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly
acquired or duplicated by others." Restatement of Torts § 757 cmt. b (1939); see also Open Records
Decision Nos. 319 at 2 (1982), 306 at 2 (1982), 255 at 2 (1980).
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US