Open Records Decision No. 375
May 5, 1983

	Re:  Whether letter relative to termination of licensed insurance agent pursuant to 
article 21.07-1 of the Insurance Code is excepted from public disclosure

Mr. Tom Bond
Commissioner
State Board of Insurance
1110 San Jacinto Boulevard
Austin, Texas  78786

Dear Mr. Bond:

	You have requested our decision under the Open Records Act, article 6252-17a, 
V.T.C.S., as to whether a letter relating to the termination of a licensed insurance agent is 
available to the public.

	You indicate that, by letter of January 27, 1971, a representative of a legal reserve 
life insurance company furnished to the State Board of Insurance information concerning 
the termination of the appointment of an individual licensed by the board.  You have 
received a request for a copy of that letter, and suggest that it is excepted from disclosure 
under section 3(a)(1) of the Open Records Act, as “information deemed confidential by 
law,” specifically, section 11 of article 21.07-1 of the Insurance Code.  That section 
provides:

	Sec. 11.	(a)	Every legal reserve life insurance company 
shall, upon termination of the appointment of any life insurance 
agent, immediately file with the Life Insurance Commissioner a 
statement of the facts relative to the termination of the appointment 
and the date and cause thereof.  The Commissioner shall thereupon 
terminate the license of such agent to represent such insurer in this 
State.

	(b)	Any information, document, record or statement required 
to be made or disclosed to the Commissioner pursuant to this 
Section shall be deemed a privileged communication and shall not 
be admissible in evidence in any court action or proceeding except 
pursuant to subpoena of a court of record.

	In Open Records Decision No. 290 (1981), this office decided that the term 
“privileged” as used in section 23 of article 4512c, V.T.C.S., the psychologists' licensing 
statute, should not be construed to mean “confidential” because such an interpretation 
“would result in conflicts within section 23 and between section 23 and the other 
statutes.”  In the usual instance, however, “privileged” has embraced the connotation of 
“confidential.”  Accident reports, for example, deemed “privileged” by section 47 of 
article 6701d, V.T.C.S., have been held to be excepted from disclosure for such reason.  
Open Records Decision Nos. 251 (1980); 43 (1974).  In addition, the attorney-client 
“privilege,” which this office has recognized to be applicable to public records, Open 
Records Decision Nos. 304 (1982); 210, 200 (1978), is within the scope of the term 
“privileged communication.”  Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway v. Williams, 96 S.W. 
1087, 1089 (Tex. Civ. App. - 1906, no writ).  In our opinion, “privileged 
communication” as used in section 11b of article 21.07-1 of the Insurance Code should 
be construed to mean “confidential” for purposes of the Open Records Act.  Accordingly, 
it is our decision that a letter relating to the termination of a licensed insurance agent and 
filed with the Board of Insurance is excepted from disclosure under section 3(a)(1) of the 
Act, as “information deemed confidential by law,” in this case, section 11 of article 
21.07-1 of the Insurance Code.

Very truly yours,

Jim Mattox
Attorney General of Texas

Tom Green
First Assistant Attorney General

David R. Richards
Executive Assistant Attorney General

Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General

Approved:
Opinion Committee

Susan L. Garrison, Chairman
Jon Bible
Rick Gilpin
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton