Skip to main content

Opinion

Opinion By: Jack Conway,Attorney General;Amye L. Bensenhaver,Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Decision

This matter having been presented to the Attorney General in an open records appeal, and the Attorney General being sufficiently advised, we find that the Department of Corrections did not violate the Open Records Act in denying Charon Anderson's January 10, 2015, request for "documentation to show that the DOC is not in contempt" of a Franklin Circuit Court order. In correspondence addressed to this office, a copy of which was mailed to Ms. Anderson, DOC denied knowledge of Ms. Anderson's request "prior to receipt of the open records appeal," but indicated that, upon receipt of the appeal, it undertook a search for a record or records "fit[ting] the description of the one requested." DOC's search yielded no results, and it promptly notified Ms. Anderson and this office that the "record requested does not exist . . . ." Because the Open Records Act does not require an agency to "embark on an unproductive fishing expedition when the likelihood of finding records that fall within the outermost limits of the zone of relevancy is slight," we find that the Act requires DOC to do nothing more. 95-ORD-96, p. 7. We affirm DOC's denial of Ms. Anderson's request based on the nonexistence of a record proving that it is not in contempt of a court order.

We make no finding on Ms. Anderson's allegation that DOC violated KRS 197.025(7) by failing to respond to her request within five business days. Ms. Anderson presents no proof that she transmitted her request to DOC and that DOC received the request. This is not the first time that DOC has disputed receipt of her requests. See, e.g., 15-ORD-020; 15-ORD-025; 15-ORD-026. This office cannot "resolve a dispute concerning actual transmission and receipt of a request," and will not assign error to DOC on these facts. 03-ORD-224; 11-ORD-012.

Either party may appeal this decision 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.

LLM Summary
The decision affirms the Department of Corrections' denial of Charon Anderson's request for documentation proving it is not in contempt of a court order, based on the nonexistence of such a record. The decision also notes that the Open Records Act does not require the agency to conduct an exhaustive search for records unlikely to exist. Additionally, it does not find fault with the DOC for not responding within five business days, as there is no proof of actual receipt of the request by DOC. Previous disputes over receipt of requests are cited to support this finding.
Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Requested By:
Charon Anderson
Agency:
Department of Corrections
Type:
Open Records Decision
Lexis Citation:
2015 Ky. AG LEXIS 48
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.