Courts

The Court of Appeals affirms the trial court's decisions requiring several documents to be released with minimal redactions. They do not constitute personnel information as defined by the Virginia Supreme Court (the first time this case went through the appeals process) because disclosure would not be an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy to a reasonable person.

The chief judge of the Norfolk Circuit Court ruled the Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads (HRT) did not have the duty to search employees' personal phones, nor did it have the authority to compel the employees to turn their phones over, in response to a FOIA request for text messages about public business that might be on the phones. The judge also allowed HRT to initiate this action under the Declaratory Judgment Act.

A Chesterfield County Circuit Court ruled that the Chesterfield Police Department can redact names of many of its officers from a spreadsheet of salary information because those officers can be used for undercover operations at any time.
 

Former police officer is not entitled to investigative records about an incident involving the officer because he is not a "data subject" under the Government Data Collection & Dessimination Practices Act. Also some FOIA issues.

The Court of Appeals of Virginia rules -- in an unpublished opinion -- that the City of Norfolk cannot withhold records related to a juvenile crime victim under §16.1-301, which, the court says, only applies to the withholding of records related to juvenile defendants.

The Court of Appeals rules that a city/town invoking the working papers and correspondence exemption (in particular, the correspondence part), cannot invoke it on behalf of both the city/town mayor AND the city/town manager (or other executive officer). The city/town must choose between the two. The court also says that the method by which Warrenton selected records for the judge to look at privately to determine if the exemption for working papers applied was inadequate. The trial judge should have required the town to prepare a federal-like Vaughn Index or to pick records randomly or representatively. Whichever method, the main this is that the government has to explain to the judge and other party why and how these records were chosen. Case is remanded for new sampling.

A report prepared by the VDOT Assurance and Compliance Office looking into allegations of an improper hiring decision should not have been redacted under the personnel exemption, but it could be withheld under an exemption for internal investigations, 2.2-3705.3(7).

Circuit Court judge Reilly Marchant rules a report prepared by a law firm for the school board was not protected by attorney-client privilege in its entirety. Specific parts that actually reflect legal advice may be redacted, but otherwise, the report is a fact-finding endeavor, not legal advice, even if legal consequences could follow from the report's release.

Hanover Circuit Court says the names of most officers in the Hanover Sheriff's office can be kept off of a spreadsheet of department salaries because some of those officers might one day work undercover.

Mecklenburg Circuit Court judge orders release of redacted records previously withheld under the personnel records exemption.