|Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas
April 7, 2000
Mr. Robert R. Ray
Dear Mr. Ray:
You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 134092.
The City of Longview (the "city") received a request for
(1) Any and all police reports, incident reports, documents, statements, videotapes, recordings, and electronic communications regarding the incident between officer Richard Baldwin and [a minor] on January 8, 2000[; and]
(2) [the] personnel file, prosecution file, and complaints against officer Richard Baldwin[.]
You inform us that there have been several previous open records requests for portions of the requested information, assigned ID numbers 133425, 133760, and 133783 by this office. You state that "[t]o the extent that [the present request] is redundant of the aforementioned previous requests, the city will rely on [its] previous briefs" to this office. However, because this request also seeks copies of the personnel file of former officer Richard Baldwin, you have submitted a sample of this additional information to our office and raised exceptions to its disclosure. You claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.108, 552.114, 552.117, 552.119, and 552.130 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted representative sample of information.(1)
Section 552.103(a), the "litigation exception," excepts from disclosure information relating to litigation to which the state or a political subdivision is or may be a party. The governmental body has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents to show that the section 552.103(a) exception is applicable in a particular situation. The test for meeting this burden is a showing that (1) litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated on the date of the request, 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). The city must meet both prongs of this test for information to be excepted under section 552.103(a).
The mere chance of litigation will not trigger section 552.103(a). Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986). To demonstrate that litigation is reasonably anticipated, the governmental body must furnish concrete evidence that litigation involving a specific matter is realistically contemplated and is more than mere conjecture. Id. Whether litigation is reasonably anticipated must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986).
You inform us that the minor named in the request was injured in a stop by Officer Baldwin on January 8, 2000. You further inform us that the injured minor retained an attorney for representation in this matter.(2) You state that "[a]ll of the requested information relates directly to the incident in question or to the background of the officer involved." Based on your arguments and the submitted information before us, we conclude that you have shown that litigation was reasonably anticipated on the date of this request. Furthermore, we find that the submitted information relates to the anticipated litigation. Therefore, except as noted below, you may withhold the submitted information pursuant to section 552.103.
We note, however, that you must release the "name, sex, ethnicity, salary, title, and dates of employment" of the individual whose personnel file was requested. Gov't Code § 552.022 (a)(2). We also note that 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 and such information must be disclosed. Open Records Decision Nos. 349 (1982), 320 (1982). In addition, the applicability of section 552.103(a) ends once the litigation concludes. Attorney General Opinion MW-575 (1982); Open Records Decision No. 350 (1982). Because section 552.103 is dispositive, we do not address your other arguments against public disclosure at this time.
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 Dep't 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.
Kathryn S. Knechtel
Ref: ID# 134092
Encl. Submitted documents
cc: Mr. Alfonso G. Chan
1. 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. You inform us that although litigation was not pending at the time of the request, litigation is now pending in this matter. However, in determining whether a governmental body has met its burden under section 552.103, the attorney general cannot consider information about occurrences after the date of the request for information. Gov't Code § 552.103(c).
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US