Court Opinion

ID: 9662816
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:18:51.506889+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:42.790816
License: Public Domain

Otis H. Turner, Justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in the result reached by the majority in this case; however, to the extent that the majority opinion may serve as precedent for the opening of an attorney’s file in response to all FOI requests, I disagree. The attorney-client privilege is well established in the law and has served the judicial process well. The mere fact that the client is a public agency and the attorney’s fee comes from a public fund is insufficient justification for a seemingly cavalier exception to the established rule. I believe that the embrace of the FOIA should not and indeed does not extend to require disclosure of purely legal memoranda — the work product of a retained attorney that remains in the exclusive possession of the attorney and that had not been previously furnished to the public agency. Holt, C.J., joins.