Synopsis of Georgia Open Records Act Cases
O.C.G.A. §§ 50-18-70, et seq

Special thanks to Georgia First Amendment Foundation Board Member Peter Canfield of Dow, Lohnes and Albertson, who prepapred the following synopsis and generously allowed the foundation to post it on its Internet site.

1959
Bradford v. Bolton, 215 Ga. 188, 192 (1959) (Head, J.):
Notes that the Open Records Act had not yet been enacted at the time the action was filed.

1971
Attorney-client privilege. Crow v. Brown, 332 F.Supp. 382, 389 n.5 (N.D.Ga. 1971) (Edenfield, J.), aff'd, 457 F.2d 788 (5th Cir. 1972):
Rejects county's contention in housing discrimination suit that memoranda written by the county attorney are inadmissible as protected by the attorney-client privilege; the court stated that only confidential attorney-client communications are so protected whereas these memoranda are Fulton County records and open to public inspection pursuant to the Open Records Act.

1974
Election petitions. Rentz v. City of Moultrie, 231 Ga. 579 (1974) (Jordan, J.):
Citizens have a right pursuant to the Open Records Act to view election petitions.
Ingram, J., dissented as to other aspects of the decision.

1976
Law enforcement records. Houston v. Rutledge, 237 Ga. 764 (1976) (Gunter, J.) :
Suit for access to files maintained by the Columbus, Georgia Sheriff relating to the deaths of inmates in the jail under his supervision. The Court rejected the Sheriff's argument and the decision of the trial court (Land, J.) that the Open Records Act make public only papers and records required to be prepared and maintained by statute. Rather, all documents, papers, and records prepared and maintained in the course of the operation of a public office are "public records."
The Court held that records made and maintained in the course of a pending investigation should not in most instances be available for inspection by the public. However,"once an investigation is concluded and the file closed, either with or without prosecution by the state, such public records in most instances should be available for public inspection." If a public official nevertheless refuses to do so, "the judiciary must balance the interest of the public in favor of inspection against the interest of the public in favor of non-inspection...."
The Court noted that "in our construction of this [the Open Records Act] statute we have attempted to apply First Amendment principles which favor open, unfettered communication and disclosure except where some limitation thereon is required in the public interest."
Justice Ingram concurred, stating "I would make it clear that, since the files here involved have been determined to be public files, there is a strong presumption that they should be made available for public inspection immediately ... [U]nless the sheriff on remand can show some persuasive reason why the files should not now be made available for public inspection, I believe we have a duty under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Code Ann. § 40-2701 to require the files to be made available for public inspection without further delay."
Justice Jordan dissented without opinion.

1978
Civil investigative records. Northside Realty Associates v. Community Relations Commission, 240 Ga. 432 (1978) (Marshall, J.):
Suit for access to records compiled by the Community Relations Commission in the course of conducting a racial discrimination "testing" campaign.
The Court made clear, as Justice Ingram had indicated in a concurring opinion in Houston v. Rutledge, that once a request for identifiable public records is made, "the burden is cast on the [records' custodian] to explain why the records should not be furnished." The case was remanded to the trial court (Wofford, J.) to allow it to balance the public interest in disclosure v. nondisclosure.

Ambulance service records. Griffin-Spalding County Hospital Authority v. Radio Station WKEU, 240 Ga. 444 (1978) (Nichols, J.):
Suit by a radio station for access to records relating to a public hospital's ambulance service.
Court affirmed the order of the trial court (Whalen, J.) that the information, with the exception of patient medical records, be produced; and ordered that the hospital separate the confidential from the non-confidential information.

1979
Board of medical examiners records. Morton v. Skrine, et. al, 242 Ga. 844 (1979) (Hall, J.):
Suit by a doctor pursuant to the Open Records Act against the state board of medical examiners for access to the board's investigatory file on him.
The Court affirmed the trial court (Weltner, J.), holding that access was prohibited by another law making such medical investigation reports confidential.

Law enforcement records. Brown v. Minter, 243 Ga. 397 (1979) (Undercofler, J.):
Suit by newspaper editor for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to certain records representing completed investigations by the Internal Investigation Unit of the Atlanta Police Department.
The Court held that the trial court (Fryer, J.) had properly afforded access to most of the documents, withholding only limited records on the ground that they would disclose information regarding on-going investigations, etc.
The Court reaffirmed that the burden of justifying non-disclosure is on the government.

1980
Privacy interests. Athens Observer, Inc. v. Anderson, 245 Ga. 63 (1980) (Undercofler, J.):
Suit by an Athens newspaper for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to a report commissioned by the vice-president of research and the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Georgia.
The Court affirmed that portion of the decision of the trial court (Gaines, J.) holding that the report was a public record and reversed that portion approving only the release of only an edited version. The Court held that the entire report was a public record and had to be produced.
The Court rejected contentions by the State that the report constituted personnel information and that its disclosure would constitute an invasion of privacy. It stated that the right of privacy does not protect "legitimate inquiry into the operation of a government institution and those employed by it. On the contrary, the public policy of this state has been clearly expressed by the legislature in adopting the Open Records Act. The purpose is not only to encourage public access to such information in order that the public can evaluate the expenditure of public funds and the efficient and proper functioning of its institutions, but also to foster confidence in government through openness to the public. That the information may comment upon certain public officials' performance of their official duties does not warrant suppression by the courts."
Finally, the Court held that the state's assertion that "such reports must be protected in order to assure candid assessments by evaluators does not overcome the need for the public to obtain the reported information."
Justice Jordan, joined by Justices Bowles and Marshall, dissented, arguing that "[t]he documents here sought are merely written evaluations or opinions of an outside group of experts. Until acted on officially by university officials such material does not assume the status of a public 'record' or writing."

Housing Authority records. Doe, et. al v. Sears, et. al and Sears v. Doe, et. al, 245 Ga. 83 (1980) (Nichols, J.):
Suit by newspaper editor for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to "certain computer printouts kept by the Atlanta Housing Authority as part of its business records," containing the names, addresses, sources of income and rents owed by tenants.
The Court held that the Act clearly applied to the Housing Authority. It further held that the "underlying implication" of the Act is that all records are open to inspection unless closed by a "specific exception." The Court thus held that the printouts were public records.
The Court rejected the decision of the trial court (Eldridge, J.) to not reveal, on grounds of privacy, names and addresses of tenants whose rents were delinquent by less than 6 months. The Court stated: "This court holds today that the general public properly is concerned with whether or not public housing tenants are paying their rentals when due. Accordingly, we hold that each of the tenants impliedly waived whatever constitutional, statutory or common law rights of privacy he may have had in the status of his rental account and the amounts and sources of his income when he allowed his rental account to become unpaid when due."

Citizenship requirement. Atchison v. Hospital Authority of the City of St. Mary's, et. al, 245 Ga. 494 (1980) (Clarke, J.):
Suit by an employee of a Florida newspaper for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to business telephone records of a public hospital.
The Court reversed the refusal of the trial court (Scoggin, J.) to afford access.

1984
Public hospital records. Richmond County Hospital Authority d/b/a University Hospital, et. al v. Southeastern Newspapers Corporation, 252 Ga. 19 (1984) (Smith, J.):
Suit by two newspapers for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to information identifying the names, salaries, and job titles of public hospital employees earning more than $28,000 annually.
In affirming the order of the trial court (Fleming, J.) compelling access, the Court stated that "[t]he public has a legitimate interest in the operation of this institution and the salaries paid to those employed there." The Court found speculative the hospital's predictions that highly qualified staff would go elsewhere and morale would plummet if salaries were disclosed. The Court found such speculation clearly insufficient to overcome "the strong public policy of this state in favor of open government."

Tax records. Pensyl v. Peach County, 252 Ga. 450 (1984) (Hill, J.):
Suit by a taxpayer for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to certain tax information on residences adjoining his.
The Court affirmed the order of the trial court (Wilcox, J.) that the records be disclosed, noting: "The General Assembly has seen fit to exempt intangible personal property and other tax records from the open records law but has not seen fit to exempt ad valorem property tax records. We are unwilling to extend the exemption to tax records which the General Assembly has not seen fit to exclude."
Justice Smith dissented without explanation.

Law enforcement records. Irvin v. Macon Telegraph Publishing Company, 253 Ga. 43 (1984) (Gregory, J.):
Suit by the Macon Telegraph against the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Director of GBI for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to records of GBI investigations concerning the conduct of several employees of the State Farmers' Market in Macon.
The Court affirmed the order of the trial court (Vaughn, J.) that the records be disclosed. The Court rejected claims that the records were personnel records and that the public interest in non-disclosure outweighed the public interest in disclosure. In doing so, the Court agreed with the trial court's conclusion that "the public has an overriding interest in learning the results of the GBI investigation and the administrative law judge's review of certain of these results. Specifically, the trial court found the public has an interest in learning 'about the operation and functioning of a public agency, namely the State Farmer's Market at Macon, and the work-related conduct of public employees; [in gaining] information [to] evaluate the expenditure of public funds and the functioning of a public institution or agency; [in having] information openly available to them so that they can be confident in the operation of their government; and [in insuring] tat both the activity of public employees suspected of wrongdoing and the conduct of those public employees who investigate the suspects is open to public scrutiny."
Justice Marshall, joined by Justice Smith, dissented, "for the reasons set forth in Justice Jordan's dissent in Athens Observer."

1986
Law enforcement records - State Patrol ticket-fixing. Harris v. Cox Enterprises, Inc., 256 Ga. 299 (1986) (per curiam):
Suit by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution for access to the GBI's report on its investigation of the Georgia State Patrol.
The Court affirmed the decision of the trial court (Daniel, J.) that the records be produced, reiterating the state's "strong policy of open government" and the Court's prior holdings that "information reflecting upon an individual's performance of official duties would not be exempt from open records."

Athletic association records. Macon Telegraph Publishing Company v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, 256 Ga. 443 (1986) (Bell, J.):
Suit by the Macon Telegraph for access pursuant to the Open Records Act of records showing the assets, liabilities, income and expenses of the University of Georgia Athletic Association.
The Court reversed the order of the trial court (Pierce, J.) denying access, concluding that "regardless of whether the documents are prepared by employees of a private Athletic Association or by Dr. Barber as Treasurer of that Association, it is clear that they are 'documents, papers and records prepared and maintained in the course of the operation of a public office,' and are therefore "public records" under the Open Records Act."

1987
Law enforcement records - Wayne Williams files. Napper v. Georgia Television Company, 257 Ga. 156 (1987) (Marshall, J.):
Suit by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, WSB and ABC News for access to the City of Atlanta's investigative files on the Atlanta child murders.
The Court affirmed the decision of the trial court (Alverson, J.) that the files were public records and should be produced, but held that "the trial court should have deleted from the files information identifying individuals who were investigated but not charged with or prosecuted for a crime, as well as information which would prove personally embarrassing to individuals who were not the targets of the investigation, unless the trial court determines that 'exceptional interests militate in favor of disclosure.'"
Judge Alverson found such exceptional interests on remand and ordered production, with few deletions.
On remand, Judge Alverson also awarded attorney's fees to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, WSB and ABC News.
F.B.I. records in local police custody. An order entered in a separate, federal action preventing disclosure of such records in the City's files that originated from the FBI was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Napper, 887 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1989).

1989
Attorney-client privilege. Atlanta Legal Aid v. City of Atlanta, No. D14722 (Fulton County Superior Court, April 14, 1989) (Sears-Collins, J.):
Suit by Atlanta Legal Aid for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to the City's records of its investigation of corruption in the City's housing rehabilitation program. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution filed an amicus brief on Atlanta Legal Aid's behalf on April 12, 1989.
On April 14, 1989, Judge Sears-Collins ordered the City to produce the records, rejecting the City's claim that since the records were compiled by the City Attorney they were exempt from disclosure as attorney-client privileged.

Public university presidential search records. Board of Regents v. The Atlanta Journal & The Atlanta Constitution & Glenn McCutchen, 259 Ga. 214 (April 25, 1989) (Weltner, J.):
Suit by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution for access to records as to candidates being considered by the Regents for the presidency of Georgia State University.
On March 24, 1989, Judge Langham ordered that the records be produced, with the exception of confidential evaluations prepared by the Regents and letters of recommendation prepared by third parties.
On April 25, 1989, the Court affirmed Judge Langham's order, rejecting the Regents' contentions (1) that the Board is not subject to the Act, (2) that all presidential search records are exempt from disclosure as "confidential evaluations," and (3) that the public interest in nondisclosure of such records outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Court noted that "it would make for a strange rule, indeed, to hold that a person who applies for a public position - to serve the public and to be paid by the public - has the right to keep secret from the public the very existence of such an application."
Justice Clarke concurred, emphasizing the statutory mandate that exceptions to the Open Records Act must be construed narrowly.
Justice Gregory concurred, noting that the Open Records Act exception for confidential evaluations of candidates for public employment and the Open Meetings Act exception for meetings to consider candidates for public employment are in harmony: "What both protect from disclosure is the give and take among decision makers so that they may make candid and difficult comparisons of the qualifications of candidates for public office and employment, and their performance once selected. ... This does not mean however that the identity and other information about candidates, officials, and employees is exempted."
Justice Marshall, joined by Justice Smith, dissented, arguing (1) that the Open Meetings Act exception for meetings to consider candidates for public employment should be read to exclude disclosure under the Open Records Act of any records maintained in connection with a presidential search and (2) that the public interest favored nondisclosure.
Justice Bell dissented without opinion.

Law enforcement records. Parker v. Lee, 259 Ga. 195 (1989) (Bell, J.):
Open Records Act exemption for law enforcement records compiled in a pending investigation applies only when there is an "imminent ad judicatory proceeding[] of finite duration." Fact that death row inmate could be tried for alleged rape, for which an indictment against him is outstanding, does not justify non-release of records.
The fact that the person requesting the records is a death row inmate is irrelevant. There is "no reason to distinguish [a death row inmate's] (or any other individual citizen's) right of access from news organizations' right of access."
Justice Marshall, joined by Justice Smith, dissented.

Records of quasi-public entities - The Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau. The Atlanta Journal & The Atlanta Constitution & Glenn McCutchen. v. The Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau, Inc., No. D63684 (Fulton County Superior Court) (Eldridge, J.):
Suit for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to records of The Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau, Inc.
On March 14, 1989, the trial court held that the Bureau is subject to the Open Records Act because of its public function (promoting tourism and convention business for the City) and because it receives over half of its funds from hotel/motel taxes and ordered the Bureau to disclose records as to its expenditure of these funds. The trial court also held that the Bureau is not required to disclose records as to its expenditure of funds received from other sources.
The Bureau appealed and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution cross-appealed and the order was stayed pending their outcome. In the Fall of 1989, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed without opinion. 259 Ga., XXX.

Coroner's inquest. Kilgore v. R. W. Page Corp., 259 Ga. 556 (1989) (Weltner, J.):
Access to coroner's records is governed by the Open Records Act.

Insurance information. Evans v. Belth, 193 Ga. App. 757 (1989) (Birdsong, J.):
O.C.G.A. § 33-2-8.1(c) requires withholding from public inspection of any and all information acquired by the Insurance Commissioner from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, provided the same was obtained under expectation of privacy by the Association at the time of information release to the Commissioner.
The section overrides the Open Records Act and applies retroactively to documents obtained prior to the section's effective date, April 10, 1989.

1990
Incident reports. Cook Publishing Company, Inc. v. Charles W. Bryant, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff of Cook
County, Georgia, Civil Action No. CV89-162 (Cook County Superior Court, March 19, 1990) (Knight, J.):
Suit against sheriff for access to incident reports.
Based upon sheriff's testimony "that he and his deputies are ready and willing to provide all future incident reports requested," newspaper's motion for injunctive relief denied.

Child abuse records. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution and Glenn McCutchen v. Georgia Department of Human Resources, No. D-73733 (Fulton County Superior Court) (Hicks, J.):
Suit for access to records of reports of child abuse and deprivation concerning children who died while under the protection of the State in 1988 and 1989.
On April 20, 1990, the trial court ordered the records produced to The Journal-Constitution but ordered the newspaper not to disclose certain identifying information in the records.

Hospital accreditation records. Georgia Hospital Association v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 477 (Oct. 4, 1990) (Clarke, J.) [(Fletcher, J., with Smith, J., dissenting)]:
Declaratory judgment action brought by the Georgia Department of Human Resources for an adjudication of the open records status of DHR records on the accreditation of hospitals, public and private, throughout the state.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and The Gwinnett Daily News intervened to seek access and the trial court (Langham, J.) ordered the records opened to the public.
The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that "[t]he public has a legitimate interest in the records which make up the DHR's hospital licensing decisions."

Public university coaches income records. Dooley v. Davidson and The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution, 260 Ga. 577 (1990) (Weltner, J.); Cremins v. The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution, 261 Ga. 496 (1991) (Fletcher, J.):
Suits involving requests by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution for access pursuant to the Open Records Act to records of athletically-related income (shoe contracts, radio and television shows, etc.) of athletic coaches at the University of Georgia and Georgia Tech.
In Dooley, the Court concluded that certain records reflecting the athletically-related "outside" income of University of Georgia athletic coaches were "public records" although they were neither on file with the University nor were they ever seen by the University President. The Court found that the records were prepared and maintained or received in the course of the operation of the University and Athletic Association because Board of Regents policies and NCAA rules required the coaches to report such income to the President and in some cases required the President's prior approval of the activity.
The Court established that the following categories of records are required to be disclosed under the Act:

(1) Records in the hands of employees that pertain to the receipt of athletic equipment and apparel;

(2) Records of outside income received in connection with the operation of the university and the [athletic] association; and

(3) Records in the hands of employees that have been prepared for the purpose of complying with reporting requirements relating to specified income.

The Court also held that records relating to money received for speaking appearances "unconnected with and not in conflict with the performance of an official duty" are not public records.
Chief Justice Clarke and Presiding Justice Smith dissented. Each would limit the definition of "public record" to those required to be maintained by law or those actually on file at the public office or agency.
After Dooley, Fulton Superior Court Judge Frank Hull granted the Newspapers' motion for summary judgment in an identical case involving athletic coaches at Georgia Tech.
On July 3, 1991, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed.

1991
Police investigatory files. McBride v. Wetherington, 199 Ga. App. 7 (1991) (Cooper, J.):
Appeal from trial court order denying appellant's claims that police department had improperly refused to grant him access to investigatory records and seeking copies of those records free of charge based on appellant's indigence.
The appellate court affirmed. The court held that O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(4) does not require a police department to turn over investigatory records when there is an ongoing investigation and, in any event, the records were later made available.
The court held that a copying fee of 25 cents per page was allowed by O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(c) and that the statute contained no provision for excusal of payment upon filing of a pauper's affidavit.

Car telephone records. Dortch v. The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution, 261 Ga. 350 (1991) (Fletcher, J.) [(Smith and Benham, JJ., dissenting)]:
Suit for access to unredacted copies of City of Atlanta car telephone records.
On September 19, 1990, the trial court (Sears-Collins, J.) ordered the records produced.
Notwithstanding that some of the calls made were personal calls for which the public official reimbursed the City, the Court held that personal information that is intermingled or co-mingled with official public documents or information that is being maintained by a city agency is subject to disclosure under the Open Records Act.
In response to the City's claim that some of the telephone numbers of persons on city cellular phones might be unlisted, the Court held that "[e]ven if we were to hold that publication of unlisted telephone numbers involved disclosure of secret or private facts, we cannot say, in the circumstances presented here, that such disclosure would be so offensive or objectionable to a reasonable man as to constitute the tort of invasion of privacy."
The Court further held that records reflecting the numbers of the City-owned cellular telephones must be disclosed notwithstanding the fact that "this could result in increased telephone bills" by virtue of calls made to the cellular phone. "While we understand the potential financial problems that disclosure of the cellular telephone numbers could create, there is presently no exemption for such records under the Act. Any such remedy must come from the General Assembly."

Psychiatric records. Southeastern Legal Foundation v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 803 (1991) (Fletcher, J.):
Suit by news organizations and the Southeastern Legal Foundation for access to records prepared and maintained or received by the State regarding the commitment, diagnosis, treatment and release of James Calvin Brady. On April 24, 1990, less than 24 hours after Brady's release from a State mental facility where he had been diagnosed as having homicidal tendencies, Brady gunned down five persons at random in a major Atlanta metropolitan shopping mall.
On May 1, 1990, the trial court (per Coursey, P.J.) denied motions for access to the records without prejudice, concluding that "[b]ased on the limited facts which have been presented, this court finds that Mr. Brady's privacy interest in his records outweighs the interest of the public at this time."
On June 13, 1990, the trial court (Castellani, J.) denied renewed motions for access despite public disclosure by Brady's attorney of portions of the records sought and despite public statements by Brady's attorney that "Mr. Brady is not interested in privacy. He wants the world to know."
On appeal, the Supreme Court, per Justice Fletcher, affirmed. The Court held that the records sought were "clinical records" which are specifically made confidential by the Mental Health Code, O.C.G.A. § 37-3-1(2). As a result, the records are exempt under the Act as "records ... which by law are prohibited or specifically exempted from being open to inspection by the general public."
The records at issue were subsequently disclosed in the course of the criminal proceedings against Mr. Brady.

Attorney's fees. GMS Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Georgia Department of Human Resources, 201 Ga. App. 136 (1991) (Pope, J.):
Where a case presented factual issues as whether the defendant agency, though it produced documents plaintiff requested after a lawsuit was filed, violated the Open Records Act by not producing them before the suit was filed and whether the violation, if any, was "completely without merit as to law or fact," the trial court (Cummings, J.) erred in granting summary judgment for the agency on plaintiff's attorney's fees claim.

Executive search records. The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution v. Atlanta Convention and Visitors Bureau, Inc. and Spencer Stuart and Associates, Inc. et al, Case No. S91A1200 (Ga.):
Suit for access to records reflecting the names, resumes and vitae of candidates for President of the Atlanta Convention and Visitor's Bureau, a private non-profit corporation which receives over 60% (nearly $6 million) of its annual budget from tax revenues. To conduct the search, the Bureau retained an executive search firm, Spencer Stuart, at a cost of $30,000.
On June 3, 1991, the trial court (Johnson, J.) issued an order holding that records sent directly to the Bureau were public records, but records which were prepared and retained by Spencer Stuart, although disclosed to and utilized by the Bureau members, were not public records.
Appeal dismissed as premature. The Newspapers subsequently dismissed the action after enactment of certain revisions to the Act.

Tax appraisals. Douglas v. Pope, Civil Action No. D-86301 (Fulton County Superior Court, April 12, 1991) (Alverson, J.):
Held that O.C.G.A. § 48-5-314 is not a blanket prohibition against the production pursuant to the Open Records Act of materials held by boards of tax assessors but rather was intended only to protect from disclosure materials, except the return, provided by taxpayers to the tax assessors office, such as taxpayer accounting records, profit and loss statements, income and expense statements, balance sheets, depreciation schedules, and like materials.
"The purpose of the confidentiality provisions of O.C.G.A. § was to protect the privacy of individual taxpayers, not to protect the board of tax assessors and its agents from public scrutiny as to their procedures, their activities, and methods of assessing property."
Attorney's fees awarded to plaintiff.

Charges for agency attorney time spent reviewing Open Records Act requests. Trammell v. Martin, 200 Ga. App. 435 (1991) (Pope, J.):
Suit for access to bills for legal services performed for and paid by Clayton County. Defendant county finance director attempted to charge plaintiff for the cost of attorney time spent reviewing the bills for exempt information. The trial court held that such a charge was not permitted under the Act.
The Court affirmed on appeal holding that the evidence showed "that defendant wrongly planned to charge plaintiff for attorney time required to review the requested documents for information exempt from disclosure. The trial court corrected this violation by ruling plaintiff could not be charged for that service since it is not a charge authorized under OCGA § 50-18-71."
The Court also held that agencies must use the most "economical means available for providing copies of public records" and remanded the case for a determination of whether the county had done so.

Complaints concerning agency employees. The City of St. Mary's v. Camden Newspapers, No. 91V0420 (Superior Court of Camden County, July 25, 1991; Aug. 20, 1991) [20 Med. L. Rep. 1131], sum. aff'd, (Ga.):
Suit for access to complaint filed by City employee complaining of harassment by City council member. The request was made more than 10 days after the complaint had been filed with the City.
The trial court (Taylor, J.) held that the complaint was not exempt from disclosure since the complaint had been presented more than 10 days previously and the City's investigation had terminated. Nor was the complaint protected from disclosure by virtue of privacy interests asserted either by the council member or the complaining employee.

Complaints concerning agency employees. The City of St. Mary's v. Camden Newspapers, No. 91V0420 (Superior Court of Camden County, July 25, 1991; Aug. 20, 1991) [20 Med. L. Rep. 1131], sum. aff'd, (Ga.):
Suit for access to complaint filed by City employee complaining of harassment by City council member. The request was made more than 10 days after the complaint had been filed with the City.
The trial court (Taylor, J.) held that the complaint was not exempt from disclosure since the complaint had been presented more than 10 days previously and the City's investigation had terminated. Nor was the complaint protected from disclosure by virtue of privacy interests asserted either by the council member or the complaining employee.

1992
Criminal enforcement. Jersawitz v. Eldridge, 262 Ga. 19 (1992) (Bell, J.):
District Administrative Judge of the Fifth Judicial District and Chief Judge of the Atlanta Judicial Circuit (Eldridge, J.) lacked authority to issue an order interpreting the Open Records Act as not permitting a private citizen to swear out an arrest warrant against a public official for violation of the Act and ordering all judicial officers and judges in the District and Circuit to refrain from issuing any such arrest warrant to any individual other than the Attorney General, District Attorney or Solicitor General acting in their official capacities.

Property appraisals. Black v. Georgia Dep't of Transportation, 262 Ga. 342 (1992) (Hunt, J.):
Appeal from trial court's denial of Open Records Act request by plaintiff to inspect appraisals of his property in connection with DOT's efforts to condemn.
The Court held that O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(6) does not require such records to be disclosed until after the condemnation proceedings conclude and DOT has acquired the property. The Court also held that O.C.G.A. § 32-3-7 should not be read to require DOT to disclose matters in condemnation proceedings that it would not ordinarily have to disclose in discovery.
Justice Weltner, joined by Justice Sears-Collins, dissented, arguing that the clear wording of O.C.G.A. § 32-3-7(a) provides that DOT "acquires" property as soon as it files a declaration of taking.

Fees. McFrugal Rental of Riverdale, Inc. v. Garr, 262 Ga. 369 (1992) (Clarke, J.):
Open Records Act plaintiff, which sought to inspect city council minutes, city zoning maps and ordinances, challenged city manager's imposition of a fee to cover the cost of a temporary employee to supervise the inspection. Denial of relief by the trial court reversed.
Emphasizing the importance of public access to government information, the Court held that "any fee imposed pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71 constitutes a burden on the public's right of access to public records. Therefore, the statute must be narrowly construed. As we construe the statute, the imposition of a fee is allowed only when the citizen seeking access requests copies of documents or requests action by the custodian that involves an unusual administrative cost or burden. Thus, a fee may not be imposed under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71 when a citizen seeks only to inspect records that are routinely subject to public inspection, such as deeds, city ordinances or zoning maps. Further the custodian of the records must bear the burden of demonstrating the reasonableness of any fee imposed."

"Secrets of State" exemption. Hardaway Co. v. Rives, 262 Ga. 631 (1992) (Bell, J.):
Appeal from ruling of trial court (Langham, J.) that "Engineer's Cost Estimate" documents generated by the Department of Transportation as part of the process of evaluating bids for work on Savannah's Talmadge Memorial Bridge were exempt from disclosure under the Open Records Act as "secrets of state," O.C.G.A. § 24-9-21(4), or "state matters of which the policy of the state and the interest of the community require concealment," O.C.G.A. § 24-9-27(d). Reversed.
The Court emphasized that "any purported statutory exemption from disclosure under the Open Records Act must be narrowly construed." The Court agreed that "the public interest in exempting engineering cost estimates from disclosure until projects are completed or abandoned outweighs the public interest in favor of disclosure," but concluded, consistent with past precedent, that the Court does not "have the discretion to judicially craft such an exemption. The balancing test which the special concurrence urges us to apply was expressly limited by Board of Regents to instances where individual privacy rights were involved."
Justice Fletcher, joined by Justice Hunt, concurred specially, concluding that a balancing was appropriate but weighed in favor of disclosure as construction had been completed.

1993
Public university student disciplinary court records. Red & Black Publishing Company v. Board of Regents, 262 Ga. 848 (1993) (Hunt, J.):
Appeal from ruling of trial court (Hull, J.) that records of the University of Georgia Student Organization Court must be disclosed to the public pursuant to the Open Records Act but that the Court's disciplinary hearings are not subject to the Open Meetings Act. Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
The Court concluded that both the records and the disciplinary hearings of the Student Organization Court must be open to the public: "We are mindful that openness in sensitive proceedings is sometimes unpleasant, difficult, and occasionally harmful. Nevertheless, the policy of this state is that the public's business must be open, not only to protect against potential abuses, but also to maintain the public's confidence in its officials." 262 Ga. at 854.

Records of private entities acting under agency direction and control. Clayton County Hospital Authority v. Webb, 206 Ga. App. 693 (1993) (Andrews, J.):
Appeal from ruling of trial court (Ison, J.) ordering Clayton County Hospital Authority (CCHA) and five affiliated corporations to produce records under the Open Records Act.
The court of appeals held that the Act applies to records of private entities when such entities function "under the direction and control of [a hospital authority] to implement the [authority's] duty to provide for the public health."
The court held that the disputed records - relating primarily to transfers of funds from the CCHA to five private affiliated corporations and to transfers of funds between any of those corporations - are public records. Citing the fact that assets of the CCHA had been transferred to some of the corporations and the fact that all of the records were in the possession or control of the CCHA, the court found that the "private status" alone of the corporations did not insulate them from the strictures of the Open Records Act.

Alleged trade secrets submitted to agency. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., d/b/a Southern Bell v. Georgia Public Service Commission, Civil Action File No. E-7376 (Fulton County Superior Court, April 16, 1993) (Eldridge, J.), affirmed without opinion (Ga.):
Appeal from administrative determination by Georgia Public Service Commission that Southern Bell must provide certain documents pursuant to a PSC order and that PSC would not agree to maintain documents confidential.
Trial court concluded that Southern Bell had demonstrated that documents constituted "trade secrets" and that PSC was obligated to maintain their confidentiality. The court determined that the Georgia Trade Secrets Act and the Georgia Open Records Act together required that the PSC not disclose the documents to the public. The court also found that Southern Bell had a property interest in the "trade secrets" and that the PSC was further prohibited under the requirements of the United States Constitution from publicly disclosing the documents.

District attorney work product. Hall v. Madison, 263 Ga. 73 (1993) (Hunstein, J.):
Appeal from denial of death row inmate's request for writ of mandamus. After murder conviction was upheld by Georgia Supreme Court, appellant sought district attorney's files relating to his prosecution pursuant to the Open Records Act. Trial court (McWhorter, J.) denied writ of mandamus without findings or conclusions. Supreme Court affirmed.
The Court concluded that petition for writ of mandamus was premature since appellant still had alternative legal remedy available to him in a habeas proceeding. The Court expressly distinguished Napper v. Ga. Television on grounds that party seeking production of files in Napper was not defendant and so did not have habeas proceeding available.

Mootness. Conklin v. Zant, 263 Ga. 165 (1993) (Carley, J.):
Appellant brought suit seeking order compelling appellees to allow him to inspect and copy certain records pursuant to the Open Records Act. Trial court (Smith, J.) dismissed action as moot based on defendant's having turned over requested records.
Supreme Court reversed because evidence showed only that appellees had turned over some, but not all, of the records requested by appellant.

1994
Police investigatory notes. Lebis v. State, 212 Ga. App. 481 (1994) (Birdsong, J.):
Appeal from denial by trial court (Pannell, J.) of criminal defendant's request for the production of investigative notes pertaining to his case. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, stating without analysis that investigative notes are "`notes' not `reports'" and cannot be classified as "police arrest reports, accident reports, or incident reports" subject to the Open Records Act.

Privately held records. Hackworth v. Board of Education for the City of Atlanta, 214 Ga. App. 17 (1994) (Smith, J., with Pope, C.J. and McMurray, P.J.):
Suit for access to personnel records of certain City of Atlanta school bus drivers. Trial court (Daniel, J.) held that personnel records held by a privately-owned transit company that contracts with the city to provide drivers were not public records.
The court of appeals reversed the trial court's decision, concluding that, because the city's contract with the transit company allowed the city to review the records and because the operation of buses is a "legitimate function of the school board and within the operation of a public agency," the records were public records despite the fact that they were not physically in the possession of the city.
The court remanded the decision to the trial court to determine whether any of the records are exempt from disclosure based on concerns of "personal privacy." Citing Dortch v. Atlanta Journal, 261 Ga. 350 (1991), the court instructed the trial court to order disclosure of all records unless disclosure would constitute the tort of invasion of privacy.

Commercial solicitation. Speer v. Miller, No. 1:92-CV-1094-RHH (N.D. Ga. August 10, 1994) (Hall, J.):
Suit for permanent injunction by criminal defense attorney preventing enforcement of O.C.G.A. § 35-1-9, which prohibits the inspection or copying of law enforcement agency records for the purpose of commercial solicitation. Prior to passage of § 35-1-9, the plaintiff had used the records to solicit clients for his legal practice, and he claimed that refusing to allow him to continue to peruse those records violated his First Amendment rights. The trial court had initially denied plaintiff's challenge, but the Eleventh Circuit reversed, ruling that "a mere reading of this statute indicates that it probably impinges upon Speer's commercial speech." Speer v. Miller, 15 F.3d 1007, 1010 (11th Cir. 1994).
On remand from the Eleventh Circuit, the district court held that O.C.G.A. § 35-1-9 violates the First Amendment and is unconstitutional because it does not directly advance a substantial state interest. The court specifically rejected the state's argument that the statute advanced the substantial interest of "protecting people's privacy." According to the court, that effect is "so riddled with exceptions that the statute's ability to advance the asserted purpose is anemic and betrays a true alternative purpose" (preventing solicitation).

On-line computer access. Jersawitz v. Hicks, No. S94A1086 (Ga., September 19, 1994) (Hunstein, J.):
The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the denial by the trial court (Langham, J.) of plaintiff's request for on-line computer access to the Fulton County real estate deed records: "While we are mindful that the prevalence of computers in homes, offices and schools may make on-line access to computerized public records desirable, requiring that means of access must be addressed by the General Assembly."

Rape incident reports. Doe v. Board of Regents, 215 Ga. App. 684 (1994) (en banc) (Beasley, J.):
Trial court refused to issue injunction sought by university employee enjoining disclosure of a university police incident report, sought by The Red & Black, regarding the employee's claim that she had been abducted and raped on the university campus by an unknown assailant.
Court of Appeals held that pursuant to the Open Records Act the newspaper is entitled to the requested report but, pursuant to O.C.G. A. § 16- 6-23(a), with the university employee's name and identifying information redacted.
Birdsong, J., Andrews, J., Blackburn, J., and Ruffin, J., dissent from the Court's decision to authorize redaction of any part of the report. Andrews, J., writes that O.C.G.A. § 16-6-23(a) "does not cover an admittedly false allegation of rape. It is undisputed that the incident investigated by the campus police did not occur. " Blackburn, J., writes that "I join Judge Andrews in concluding that appellant has lost any right she would otherwise have had to keep her identity from being disclosed because of her admitted fabrications and the superior right of the public to know of the falsity of her original complaint, and the right to know who falsely complained.

1995
Tax information. Bowers v. Shelton, 265 Ga. 247 (1995) (Thompson, J.):
Affirming order of trial court (Jenrette, J.) entering permanent injunction pursuant to Open Records Act preventing Attorney General from disclosing confidential tax information contained in closed criminal investigation file.

Police incident reports. City of Brunswick v. The Atlanta Journal- Constitution and The Florida Times- Union, 265 Ga. 413 (1995) (Carley, J.):
Appeal from order of trial court (Williams, J.) requiring City to disclose serial rape incident reports despite City's professed concern that doing so would hamper investigation and pose risk to victims' safety. For these reasons, and based upon an ex parte presentation by the City, the trial court had initially refused to order production. However, the trial court reversed itself and ordered production after the Times-Union published an article disclosing certain facts relating to the incidents.
Cross-appeal by The Journal-Constitution and The Times-Union challenging the trial court's conclusion that incident reports can ever be protected and that it was proper to hear City's witnesses ex parte.
Supreme Court affirmed in all respects, concluding that portions of incident reports may be exempted from disclosure to the extent they contain confidential information otherwise exempted from disclosure under the Act.

Hospital authorities. Northwest Georgia Health System, Inc. v. Times- Journal, Inc., 218 Ga. App. 336 (1995) (McMurray, J.):
Appeal from order of trial court (Hines, J.) holding that combinations of private hospitals and public hospital authorities are subject to the provisions of the Open Meetings and Open Records Acts.
Court of Appeals affirmed, stating that "[w]ithout question, these private, nonprofit corporations became the vehicle through which the public hospital authorities carried out their official responsibilities."

1996
Fees. Powell v. Von Canon, 219 Ga. App. 840,467 S.E.2d 193 (1996) (Johnson, J.):
Appeal from order of trial court (Wood, J.) holding that defendant government officials are limited to charging only the actual cost of computer disk or tape onto which requested information is transferred and, after the first quarter hour of work, only the hourly wage of the lowest paid full-time employee capable of overseeing or performing transfer.
Court of Appeals affirmed as to all defendants except clerk of superior court on ground that superior court clerks are authorized by O.C.G.A. § 15-6-96 to sell computer generated records for a profit.

911 incident cards. The Bainbridge Post Searchlight, Inc. v. Decatur County, No. 96-V-302 (Decatur County Superior Court, Sept. 10, 1996) (Cato, J.):
Action to require county to make available for public inspection 911 incident cards completed by 911 dispatchers for the purpose of registering, dispatching and preserving information from callers that is necessary or important for an appropriate emergency agency to effectively respond to the emergency.
Held that 911 incident cards are equivalent to initial police incident reports and must be made open for inspection by the public at reasonable times at the 911 facility where the cards are kept.

Settlement agreements. City of Helen v. Mite County News, No. 96-CV-409DB (White County Superior Court, Oct. 7, 1996) (Barrett, J.):
Action for access to documents relating to settlement of former police chief's civil rights action against city.
Held that "[c]onsistent with the public policy of the Open Records Act, the public has a right to know the terms of a settlement agreement in which a public entity has settled a lawsuit" and that "the nondisclosure provisions of the Settlement Agreement ... are void as against the public policy of the State of Georgia. " The court rejected the city's contention that disclosure would be improper because "a right of privacy may exist on behalf of those individuals in the underlying lawsuit."

District Attorney records. Felker v. Lukemire, 267 Ga. 296 (1996) (Thompson, J.):
Action by death row inmate for access to district attorney's records on prosecution. After hearing and production of additional records, trial court found that the district attorney had complied with inmate's request and denied relief.
The Supreme Court affirmed, finding that "the district attorney fully complied with his obligations under the Act. And he had no reason to suspect that he did not comply."

1997
Inmate appeals. Hall v. Linahan, 225 Ga. App. 439 (1997) (McMurray, J.):
Appeal by state prison inmate of trial court order concerning inmate's Open Records Act requests.
Because inmate was currently in the custody of Department of Corrections, held that appeal was controlled by Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, O.C.G.A. § 42-12-1 et seq., and, because no application for discretionary review had been filed, had to be dismissed.

Child abuse records. In re Hansen, No. 165958 (Fulton County Juvenile Court, Nov. 14, 1997) (Hatchett, J.):
Granting access pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 49-5-41(B) to records of Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Family and Children Services, of all Georgia children who died between January 1, 1993 and August 31, 1997 and had been reported previously to state protective service workers.

Privacy of public employees. Chatham County v. Adventure Radio Group, et al., Case No. CV97-1406-FR (Eastern Judicial Circuit Superior Court, Dec. 22, 1997) (Freesemann, J.):
Denying request of county and certain county employees to redact the names of certain county employees who were the subject of tape-recorded derogatory remarks by senior police officials. "The Court sympathizes with the female employees who desire to keep their names secreted. Unfortunately, however, these women have, albeit unwillingly, become figures in a public drama. Therefore, dissemination of information pertaining to this drama is no violation of their right to privacy."
Granting request of Savannah Morning News and WSAV-TV for injunction requiring access.

1998
Motor vehicle accident reports. Statewide Detective Agency v. Zell Miller, 115 F.3d 904 (11th Cir. 1997) (Barkett, J.):
A private detective agency filed suit against the Governor and the Attorney General of Georgia, seeking to enjoin enforcement of statute criminalizing request for motor vehicle accident reports for commercial solicitation purposes.
Affirming the District Court preliminary injunction order, the 11th Circuit Court held that the statute represented an unconstitutional restraint of commercial speech.

Investigatory report concerning sexual harassment. Fincher v. State, 231 Ga. App. 49 (1998) (Ruffin, J.):
Pursuant to the Open Records Act, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles of Georgia released to a local television station an investigatory report concerning claims that one of its employees had sexually harassed a co-worker. The employee sued claiming invasion of privacy.
Affirming the dismissal, the Court of Appeals found that the report was a public record not subject to any exemptions under the Georgia Open Records Act. The Court further found that the public interest in obtaining the report outweighs any private interest.

1999
Settlement Records. Savannah College of art and Design v. School of Visual Arts Inc., 270 Ga. 791 (1999) (Hunstein, J.):
Appeal concerning public access to court records in a civil case. The trial court ordered that confidential settlement documents filed with a discovery motion should be open because the plaintiff failed to meet its burden in limiting access. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the plaintiff’s privacy interest in the documents clearly outweighed the public’s interest in access.

Discovery procedures considered adequate legal remedy. Millar v. Fayette County Sheriff’s Dept., 241 Ga.App. 659 (1999) (Blackburn, J.):
Attorney’s action against county and county sheriff under Georgia’s Open Records Act, seeking injunction requiring them to turn over certain public records relating to his client’s federal action against them, was premature; when request for injunction was made, attorney retained adequate legal remedy, namely right to seek defendants’ records through discovery procedures in his federal action. Eldridge and Barnes, J.J. concurring.

2000
Verbal requests for records. Howard v. Sumter Free Press, Inc., 272 Ga. 521 (2000) (Hines, J.):
Sheriff’s contention that he was not required to comply with verbal requests by the press for access to public records, but only to “bona fide” written requests, was unavailing. Verbal requests do not diminish their efficacy under the Open Records Act.

Records versus information. Schulten v. Fulton-Dekalb Hospital Authority, 272 Ga. 725 (2000) (Carley, J.):
Law firm filed writ of mandamus to compel hospital to permit inspection and copying of records since 1995. Court denied relief, because request would violate Open Records Act by requiring hospital to compile and prepare reports that were not yet in existence.
Failure by hospital to furnish non-existent records does not constitute a denial of a request for access to public records.

2001
Trade secrets. Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources et al. V. Theragenics Corp., 273 Ga. 724 (2001) (Carley, J.):
Trade secrets exception to disclosure under the Act not expressly limited to documents specifically identified as confidential at time of submission to agency.
Because Act places ultimate responsibility for non-disclosure on agency, agency cannot construe submitter’s failure to identify all trade secrets at time of original filing as waiver of confidentiality.

Internet access. J.K. Champton, M.D. v. State, Civil Action File No. 2000CV26375 (Fulton Superior, April 9, 2001) (Goger, J.):
Trial court dismissed complaint for injunction to prevent continued public Internet access to the fact that plaintiff doctor had entered into a disciplinary consent order with the State Board of Medical Examiners, holding, inter alia, that Act mandated access.

Motor vehicle records. Spottsville v. Barnes, 135 F.Supp.2d 1316 (N.D. Ga. 2001) (Thrash, Jr., J.):
Challenge to 1999 amendment to the Open Records Act that restricts disclosure of motor vehicle accident reports to certain designated groups of persons including the media. The amendment was upheld and found not to be unconstitutional prior restraint on commercial speech.

Police reports concerning rape. Dye v. Wallace, 274 Ga. 257 (2001)
Trial court held that Georgia’s Rape Confidentiality Statute, which made it unlawful for the media to identify rape victims, was unconstitutional.
Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the media can publish information from police reports that are lawfully obtained.