January 5, 2011

Ms. Ashley D. Fourt

Assistant District Attorney

Tarrant County

401 West Belknap, 9^th Floor

Fort Worth, Texas 76196

OR2011-00268

Dear Ms. Fourt:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 404932.

The Tarrant County Sheriff's Department (the "sheriff") received a request for the requestor's internal affairs division file. You claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code. We have considered the exception you claim and reviewed the submitted information.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Gov't Code § 552.101. Section 552.101 also encompasses the doctrine of common-law privacy, which protects information if it (1) contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) is not of legitimate concern to the public. Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976). To demonstrate the applicability of common-law privacy, both prongs of this test must be established. Id. at 681-82.

In Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied), the court addressed the applicability of the common-law privacy doctrine to files of an investigation of allegations of sexual harassment in an employment context. The investigation files in Ellen contained individual witness statements, an affidavit by the individual accused of the misconduct responding to the allegations, and conclusions of the board of inquiry that conducted the investigation. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d at 525. The court ordered the release of the affidavit of the person under investigation and the conclusions of the board of inquiry, stating that the public's interest was sufficiently served by the disclosure of such documents. Id. In concluding, the Ellen court held that "the public did not possess a legitimate interest in the identities of the individual witnesses, nor the details of their personal statements beyond what is contained in the documents that have been ordered released." Id.

Thus, if there is an adequate summary of an investigation of alleged sexual harassment, the investigation summary must be released under Ellen, along with the statement of the accused, but the identities of the victims and witnesses of the alleged sexual harassment must be redacted, and their detailed statements must be withheld from disclosure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 393 (1983), 339 (1982). If no adequate summary of the investigation exists, then all of the information relating to the investigation ordinarily must be released, with the exception of information that would identify the victims and witnesses. We note that since common-law privacy does not protect information about a public employee's alleged misconduct on the job or complaints made about a public employee's job performance, the identity of the individual accused of sexual harassment is not protected from public disclosure. See Open Records Decision Nos. 438 (1986), 405 (1983), 230 (1979), 219 (1978).

Upon review, we find the submitted information pertains to a sexual harassment investigation and is subject to the ruling in Ellen. The submitted information includes an adequate summary, as well as a statement by the person accused of sexual harassment. The summary and statement of the accused are not confidential under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy; however, information within the summary and statement of the accused that identifies the victims and witnesses must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. See Ellen, 840 S.W.2d at 525. Thus, this identifying information, which we have marked, is confidential under common-law privacy and must be withheld pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code. See id. Further, the sheriff must withhold the additional records of this sexual harassment investigation, which we have marked, under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy and the court's holding in Ellen. However, the sheriff has failed to demonstrate how any portion of the remaining information constitutes records of a sexual harassment investigation. Thus, no portion of the remaining information may be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code also encompasses the constitutional right to privacy. Constitutional privacy protects two kinds of interests. See Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589, 599-600 (1977); Open Records Decision Nos. 600 at 3-5 (1992), 478 at 4 (1987), 455. The first is the interest in independence in making certain important decisions related to the "zones of privacy," pertaining to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education, that have been recognized by the United States Supreme Court. See Fadjo v. Coon, 633 F.2d 1172 (5th Cir. 1981); Open Records Decision No. 455 at 3-7 (1987). The second constitutionally protected privacy interest is in freedom from public disclosure of certain personal matters. See Ramie v. City of Hedwig Village, Tex., 765 F.2d 490 (5th Cir.1985); ORD 455 at 6-7. This aspect of constitutional privacy balances the individual's privacy interest against the public's interest in the information. See ORD 455 at 7. Constitutional privacy under section 552.101 is reserved for "the most intimate aspects of human affairs." Id. at 8 (quoting Ramie, 765 F.2d at 492). Upon review, we find no portion of the remaining information falls within the zones of privacy or otherwise implicates an individual's privacy interests for purposes of constitutional privacy. Therefore, the sheriff may not withhold this information under section 552.101 in conjunction with constitutional privacy. ⁽¹⁾

In summary, the sheriff must withhold the information we have marked under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. The remaining information must be released.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular information 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 information or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For more information concerning those rights and responsibilities, please visit our website at http://www.oag.state.tx.us/open/index_orl.php, or call the Office of the Attorney General's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable charges for providing public information under the Act must be directed to the Cost Rules Administrator of the Office of the Attorney General, toll free at (888) 672-6787.

Sincerely,

Vanessa Burgess

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

VB/dls

Ref: ID# 404932

Enc. Submitted documents

c: Requestor

(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. We note the information being released contains confidential information to which the requestor has a right of access. See Gov't Code § 552.023 (person has special right of access to information that relates to the person and that is protected from disclosure by laws intended to protect person's privacy interests). Thus, if the sheriff receives another request for this particular information from a different requestor, then the sheriff should again seek a decision from this office.

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