July 16, 2002

Mr. William R. Pilat
Davis, Oretsky & Guilfoyle
1415 Louisiana, Suite 4200
Houston, Texas 77002

OR2002-3877

Dear Mr. Pilat:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 165716.

The City of League City (the "city"), which you represent, received a request for a copy of a specified police report. You claim that the submitted information may be excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code. We have considered the exception you claim and have reviewed the submitted information. We have also considered comments submitted by the requestor. See Gov't Code § 552.304 (providing that interested party may submit comments stating why information should or should not be released).

We note at the outset that the city failed to comply with the procedural requirements of section 552.301 of the Government Code. Section 552.301 provides that a governmental body that requests an attorney general decision concerning a request for information must, within a reasonable time but not later than the fifteenth business day after the date of receiving the written request, submit to the attorney general, among other items, a copy of the written request for information and a signed statement as to the date on which the written request was received by the governmental body or evidence sufficient to establish that date. See Gov't Code § 552.301(e)(1)(B), (C). We note that the city failed to provide us with this particular information within fifteen business days of receiving the request for information.

When a governmental body fails to comply with the procedural requirements of section 552.301 of the Government Code, the information at issue is presumed public. See Gov't Code § 552.302; see also Hancock v. State Bd. of Ins., 797 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. App.--Austin 1990, no writ); City of Houston v. Houston Chronicle Publ'g Co., 673 S.W.2d 316, 323 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, no writ); Open Records Decision No. 319 (1982). The governmental body must demonstrate a compelling interest to withhold the information to overcome this presumption. See id. Normally, a compelling interest is a demonstration that some other source of law makes the requested information confidential or that third party interests are at stake. See Open Records Decision No. 150 at 2 (1977). Since you claim that the submitted information may be excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code, we address your claim.

You claim that the information at issue may be excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 in conjunction with the common-law right to privacy.⁽¹⁾ Information is protected from disclosure under the common-law right to privacy if (1) the information contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) the information is not of legitimate concern to the public. See Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 931 (1977). The type of information considered intimate and embarrassing by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation included information relating to sexual assault, pregnancy, mental or physical abuse in the workplace, illegitimate children, psychiatric treatment of mental disorders, attempted suicide, and injuries to sexual organs. See id. at 683. We find that the information at issue contains highly intimate and embarrassing facts the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person and that this information is of no legitimate concern to the public. We note that, in this instance, the requestor knows the identity of the victim noted in the submitted report. Thus, based on our review of the information, we conclude that the city must withhold the entirety of the information from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with the common-law right to privacy.

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,

Ronald J. Bounds
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division

RJB/seg

Ref: ID# 165716

Enc. Submitted documents

cc: Ms. Michelle L. Frankenfield
1404 Lamesa
Pasadena, Texas 77506-4028
(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision. Section 552.101 encompasses information protected by the common-law right to privacy.
 

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