Click for home page Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas
John Cornyn
image
 

June 5, 2000

Ms. Lillian Guillen Graham
Assistant City Attorney
Office of the City Attorney
City of Mesquite
P.O. Box 850137
Mesquite, Texas 75185-0137

OR2000-2208

Dear Ms. Graham:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 136019.

The City of Mesquite (the "city") received two requests for information pertaining to the arrest of the requestors' son. You claim that the information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.103, and 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted representative sample of the information requested.(1)

Initially, we note that you have raised section 552.028, which provides:

(a) A governmental body is not required to accept or comply with a request for information from:

(1) an individual who is imprisoned or confined in a correctional facility; or

(2) an agent of that individual, other than that individual's attorney when the attorney is requesting information that is subject to disclosure under this chapter.

(b) This section does not prohibit a governmental body from disclosing to an individual described by Subsection (a)(1), or that individual's agent, information held by the governmental body pertaining to that individual.

(c) In this section, 'correctional facility' has the meaning assigned by Section 1.07(a), Penal Code.

Gov't Code 552.028. You represent that the requestors are seeking this information for their son, an individual who is imprisoned in a correctional facility. One of the requestors argues, in a letter to this office, that she makes this request, not as her son's agent, but for her own purposes. If the requestors are indeed acting as their son's agents, the Act gives the city the discretion to either "comply with" this request or deny it in its entirety. See also Conely v. Peck, 929 S.W.2d 630 (Tex. App.--Austin 1996).

Some of the documents submitted for our review include arrest warrants and their accompanying probable cause affidavits that have been signed by a magistrate and appear to have been filed with a court. Section 552.022(a)(17) of the Government Code states that information that is also contained in a public court record is not excepted from disclosure under the Act, unless confidential under other law. Moreover, documents filed with a court are generally considered public. Star-Telegram, Inc. v. Walker, 834 S.W.2d 54 (Tex. 1992). Therefore, you must release any public court documents to the requestor.

Section 552.103(a) excepts from disclosure information relating to litigation to which a governmental body is or may be a party. The governmental body has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents to show that section 552.103(a) is applicable in a particular situation. In order to meet this burden, the governmental body must show that (1) litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated, and (2) the information at issue is related to that litigation. University of Tex. Law Sch. v. Texas Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479 (Tex. App.--Austin 1997, no pet.); Heard v. Houston Post Co., 684 S.W.2d 210, 212 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). Section 552.103 requires concrete evidence that litigation may ensue. To demonstrate that litigation is reasonably anticipated, the city must furnish evidence that litigation is realistically contemplated and is more than mere conjecture. Open Records Decision No. 518 at 5 (1989). Whether litigation is reasonably anticipated must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986).

The records at issue relate to the arrest of an individual who was initially charged with several offenses, all but one of which were dismissed. You state that "until the statute of limitations has expired on all the dismissed charges, theoritically [sic], there is anticipated litigation to which the City may be a party." However, litigation must be realistically, not theoretically, contemplated. Therefore, you have not established that litigation is reasonably anticipated.

However, you also claim that the requested information concerns an arrest that is the basis of a civil suit against the city that is currently pending in federal court. Based upon your representations of the pending civil suit, we find that the requested documents are directly related to pending civil litigation. Therefore, the city may withhold the requested information pursuant to section 552.103.(2)

Generally, once information has been obtained by all parties to the litigation through discovery or otherwise, no section 552.103(a) interest exists with respect to that information. Open Records Decision Nos. 349 (1982), 320 (1982). Thus, information that has either been obtained from or provided to the opposing party in the anticipated litigation is not excepted from disclosure under section 552.103(a), and must be disclosed.(3) We also note that the applicability of section 552.103(a) ends once the litigation has concluded. Attorney General Opinion MW-575 (1982); Open Records Decision No. 350 (1982).

This letter ruling is limited to the particular records at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other records or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For example, governmental bodies are prohibited from asking the attorney general to reconsider this ruling. Gov't Code 552.301(f). If the governmental body wants to challenge this ruling, the governmental body must appeal by filing suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. 552.324(b). In order to get the full benefit of such an appeal, the governmental body must file suit within 10 calendar days. Id. 552.353(b)(3), (c). If the governmental body does not appeal this ruling and the governmental body does not comply with it, then both the requestor and the attorney general have the right to file suit against the governmental body to enforce this ruling. Id. 552.321(a).

If this ruling requires the governmental body to release all or part of the requested information, the governmental body is responsible for taking the next step. Based on the statute, the attorney general expects that, within 10 calendar days of this ruling, the governmental body will do one of the following three things: 1) release the public records; 2) notify the requestor of the exact day, time, and place that copies of the records will be provided or that the records can be inspected; or 3) notify the requestor of the governmental body's intent to challenge this letter ruling in court. If the governmental body fails to do one of these three things within 10 calendar days of this ruling, then the requestor should report that failure to the attorney general's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at 877/673-6839. The requestor may also file a complaint with the district or county attorney. Id. 552.3215(e).

If this ruling requires or permits the governmental body to withhold all or some of the requested information, the requestor can appeal that decision by suing the governmental body. Id. 552.321(a); Texas Department of Public Safety v. Gilbreath, 842 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex. App.-Austin 1992, no writ).

If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments about this ruling, they may contact our office. Although there is no statutory deadline for contacting us, the attorney general prefers to receive any comments within 10 calendar days of the date of this ruling.

Sincerely,

Amanda Crawford
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division

AEC/nc

Ref: ID# 136019

Encl. Submitted documents

cc: Ms. Bennie Lewis
4202 Maryland
Dallas, Texas 75216
(w/o enclosures)

Mr. Johnnie Lewis
4202 Maryland
Dallas, Texas 75216
(w/o enclosures)


 

Footnotes

1. In reaching our conclusion here, we assume that the "representative sample" of records submitted to this office is truly representative of the requested records as a whole. See Open Records Decision Nos. 499 (1988), 497 (1988). This open records letter does not reach, and therefore does not authorize the withholding of, any other requested records to the extent that those records contain substantially different types of information than that submitted to this office.

2. As we resolve this matter under section 552.103, we need not address the other exceptions you have raised. We caution, however, that some of the information may be confidential by law or may implicate the proprietary interest of a third party. Therefore, if the city receives a request in the future, at a time when litigation is no longer reasonably anticipated or pending, the city should seek a ruling from this office on the other exceptions raised before releasing any of the requested information. See Gov't Code 552.352 (distribution of confidential information may constitute criminal offense).

3. Generally, basic information may not be withheld from public disclosure under section 552.103. Open Records Decision No. 362 (1983); see also Houston Chronicle Publishing Co. v. City of Houston, 531 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Civ. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1975), writ ref'd n.r.e. per curiam, 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1976) (basic information defined).
 

POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US
An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer


Home | ORLs