Facts:  Suspecting illegal nepotism in respondent Spokane County’s hiring practices, the petitioner Neighborhood Alliance of Spokane County submitted a request for public records to the county pursuant to the Public Records Act (Washington Revised Code §42.56).  After the county responded to the request by providing the Neighborhood Alliance with one document that was not the original version of the requested record and by claiming that the other requested record does not exist, the Neighborhood Alliance filed suit against the county in the Superior Court for Lincoln County.  Prior to trial, the trial court limited discovery by the Neighborhood Alliance by limiting the scope of the Neighborhood Alliance’s deposition of county employees.  The trial court subsequently granted summary judgment for the county, ruling that no evidence had been produced indicating that the missing record exists.  Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part the trial court’s decision, holding that the county’s search for the original version of the document that it produced was inadequate but that the trial court had properly limited the scope of discovery.  The Neighborhood Alliance appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s):   What is an adequate search for purposes of the Public Records Act?

Do civil discovery rules apply to actions brought pursuant to the Public Records Act?

Conclusion:  Justice Charles W. Johnson’s opinion for the Court reversed in part the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that the definition of an adequate search for purposes of the Public Records Act is the same as the definition of an adequate search for purposes of the federal Freedom of Information Act, which judges the adequacy of a search by a standard of reasonableness.  Thus, the Court held that the county had not conducted an adequate search as it had limited its search to one record system when there was another likely to contain the records requested.  The Court also found that civil discovery rules control the scope of discovery in actions brought pursuant to the Public Records Act and that the trial court had therefore improperly limited the scope of discovery.  Consequently, the Court remanded the case to the trial court.

Docket No. 84108-0 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 27184-6)

Petitioner: Neighborhood Alliance of Spokane County

(Counsel: Breean Lawrence Beggs and Bonne W. Beavers)

Respondent: Spokane County

(Counsel: Patrick Mark Risken)

Briefs:

Argument: Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, September 29th, 2011

Prevailing Party: Neighborhood Alliance of Spokane County (Petitioner)

Vote: 9-0

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen2 Court (2011-)

Madsen
(Concurs)

Johnson
(Majority)

Alexander

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens

Wiggins