June 18, 2002

Ms. Tamara Pitts
Assistant City Attorney
City of Fort Worth
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102

OR2002-3299

Dear Ms. Pitts:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 164457.

The Fort Worth Municipal Court (the "municipal court") received a request for information relating to a named individual. You claim that the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.107, and 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you raise and have reviewed the information you submitted.

We note, however, that this request for information is addressed to the municipal court. Moreover, you indicate that the responsive information consists of records of the municipal court. Therefore, we must consider whether chapter 552 of the Government Code is applicable in this instance. Chapter 552 defines "public information" as consisting of "information collected, assembled, or maintained . . . by a governmental body" or "for a governmental body and the governmental body owns the information or has a right of access to it." Gov't Code § 552.002(a). The definition of governmental body "does not include the judiciary." See id. § 552.003(1)(B). Thus, chapter 552 is not applicable to judicial records. See also Benavides v. Lee, 665 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1983, no writ); Attorney General Opinion DM-166 (1992); Open Records Decision No. 618 at 4 (1993). Therefore, because this request for information is addressed to the municipal court, and the responsive information consists of court records, the municipal court is not required to comply with this request under chapter 552 of the Government Code. See Attorney General Opinion DM-166 at 1 (chapter 552 neither authorizes information held by judiciary to be withheld nor requires it to be disclosed). We note, however, that certain judicial records may be open to the public under sources of law other than chapter 552. See Star-Telegram, Inc. v. Walker, 834 S.W.2d 54 (Tex. 1992) (documents filed with a court are generally considered to be public); Attorney General Opinion DM-166 at 3 (public has general right to inspect and copy judicial records); Open Records Decision No. 618 at 4 (Texas courts have recognized common-law right of public to inspect and copy records of judiciary). As chapter 552 is not applicable in this instance, we need not address sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.107, or 552.108.

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).

Please remember that under the Act the release of information triggers certain procedures for costs and charges to the requestor. If records are released in compliance with this ruling, be sure that all charges for the information are at or below the legal amounts. Questions or complaints about over-charging must be directed to Hadassah Schloss at the Texas Building and Procurement Commission at 512/475-2497.

If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments about this ruling, they may contact our office. We note that a third party may challenge this ruling by filing suit seeking to withhold information from a requestor. Gov't Code § 552.325. 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,

James W. Morris, III
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division
JWM/sdk
Ref: ID# 164457
Enc: Submitted documents

c: Ms. Sonya Bailey-Bivens
The Barbknecht Firm
8144 Walnut Hill Lane
Suite 650, LB 101
Dallas, Texas 75231
(w/o enclosures)

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