Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: Albert B. Chandler III, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter comes to the Attorney General as an appeal by Eric Charlton in connection with his open records request for copies of court transcripts from the court reporter for the Hickman Circuit Court.
In a letter dated September 10, 1998, addressed to Donna K. Hill, Official Court Reporter, First Judicial District, and designated as a request under the Open Records Act, Mr. Charlton asked the court reporter for copies of "Court Transcripts."
Mr. Charlton's letter of appeal to this office, dated September 25, 1998, alleges that he had yet to receive a response to his request.
After receipt of this office's "Notification to Agency of Receipt of Open Records Appeal," Ms. Hill submitted a response to Mr. Charlton's letter of appeal. In her response, Ms. Hill explained that Mr. Charlton's open records request made no specific request at to what records he was seeking. On September 15, 1998, she responded to Mr. Charlton's request and asked him to specify the records he would like transcribed as well as make necessary financial arrangements for the copies. In her response to this office, Ms. Hill further stated that she would be happy to supply Mr. Charlton any transcripts he desires, but as of October 7, 1998, she had received no response from Mr. Charlton specifying which transcripts or documents he was seeking.
This office has consistently recognized that records of the courts are not governed by the Open Records Act. In Ex Parte Farley, Ky., 570 S.W.2d 617, 624 (1978), the Kentucky Supreme Court held "that the custody and control of the records generated by the courts in the course of their work are inseparable from the judicial function itself, and are not subject to regulation." See also York v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 815 S.W.2d 415 (1991); KRS 26A.200 and KRS 26A.220; and 94-ORD-105.
In 97-ORD-119, we held that the failure of the court reporter for the Green Circuit Court to respond to an open records request for court records in the possession of the court reporter was not a violation of the Open Records Act, as records of the courts are not subject to the terms and provisions of the Act.
Accordingly, we conclude the Hickman Circuit Court reporter did not violate the terms and provisions of the Kentucky Open Records Act. KRS 61.870 through KRS 61.884 are not applicable to the records of the court system. Such records are subject to the control and direction of the Kentucky Supreme Court.
Mr. Charlton's avenue for access to court records is through the court system. As noted above, Ms. Hill has indicated that she would make the records available to Mr. Charlton if he would clearly itemize the records he seeks and make the necessary arrangements for payment of the copies.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.