577 S.W.3d 59
Ark. Ct. App.2019Background
- Brewer submitted a FOIA request to Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS) seeking personnel and related communications for former employee Leslie Rutledge (now Attorney General).
- DHS produced 51 pages on July 27, 2018, but withheld/redacted eight pages (seven contested pages on appeal) asserting FOIA exemptions for personnel and employee-evaluation records.
- Brewer sued in Pulaski County Circuit Court alleging DHS violated FOIA and arguing strong public interest given Rutledge's public office and alleged termination versus resignation.
- The circuit court conducted in camera review, heard testimony, and found DHS improperly withheld the seven pages, ordering DHS to produce the materials; DHS complied with the production before appealing.
- On appeal DHS argued the trial court erred in finding the records disclosable; the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as moot because the documents had already been released and no live controversy remained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS properly withheld personnel/evaluation records under FOIA exemptions | Brewer: public interest in disclosure; Rutledge as public figure; records necessary to determine if she was terminated (public-safety/public-trust concerns) | DHS: records are personnel/employee-evaluation records exempt under A.C.A. § 25-19-105(b)(12) and § 25-19-105(c)(1); some emails unavailable; Rutledge voluntarily resigned | Appeal dismissed as moot because DHS produced the documents; court did not address merits |
| Whether mootness exceptions require review | Brewer: likely relied on public interest and recurrence to keep issue live | DHS: argued exceptions (capable of repetition yet evading review; substantial public interest) warranted review | Court declined exceptions: issues not guaranteed to evade review and fact-specific; prior authority addresses similar issues; no prevention of future litigation benefit |
Key Cases Cited
- Nabholz Constr. Corp. v. Contractors for Pub. Prot. Ass'n, 371 Ark. 411 (2007) (three-part test for FOIA coverage: possession by covered entity, falls within public-record definition, not exempt)
- Stilley v. McBride, 332 Ark. 306 (1998) (public-interest considerations in personnel-record disclosure)
- Young v. Rice, 308 Ark. 593 (1992) (privacy/public-interest balancing for personnel records)
- Davis v. Van Buren Sch. Dist., 2019 Ark. App. 157, 572 S.W.3d 466 (recent appellate treatment of personnel/evaluation records under FOIA)
- Protect Fayetteville v. City of Fayetteville, 2019 Ark. 28, 566 S.W.3d 105 (discussion of mootness and exceptions)