Court Opinion

ID: 9845684
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:26:18.609828+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:18.454712
License: Public Domain

Smith, Presiding Justice,
dissenting.
I would remand this case to the trial court, but in so doing would direct the court as follows: Unless a contract, paper, document, report, letter, memorandum, or like paper, or instrument was received and filed by the University of Georgia or the Athletic Association of the University of Georgia, it would not be “in the course of the operation of a public office or agency” and, therefore, not subject to disclosure. To hold otherwise would be to allow a blatant invasion of personal privacy.
To label as public records the reports of the coaches, set out in Division 6 (a) of the majority opinion, that are used to prepare their annual report is ridiculous. The annual report tells all. Must the coach produce his work sheets, adding machine tapes, computer information, etc., on the basis that they are “in the course of the operation of a public office or agency?” If the University and Athletic Department are satisfied with the annual report as filed, it is no one else’s business.
Are the appellees intimating that the University and or Athletic Association would cover up and not do their job? If private memos, etc. are deemed public records today — what tomorrow? Leave the coaches their privacy. Papers not in the possession or filed with the *584University or Athletic Association are private papers.
Decided November 29, 1990.
Chilivis & Grindler, Nicholas P. Chilivis, Anthony L. Cochran, for appellants.
Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, George P. Shingler, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Rogers & Hardin, Hunter R. Hughes III, Dow, Lohnes & Albertson, Terrence B. Adamson, Peter C. Canfield, James A. Demetry, for appellees.