Koenig v. Thurston County
175 Wash. 2d 837
Wash.2012Background
- Koenig files PRA requests seeking Lerud case files, including victim impact statements and SSOSA evaluation; court sealed those documents to protect privacy.
- Thurston County provided a redacted package, believing VIS and SSOSA were PRA-exempt as investigative records.
- Court of Appeals held VIS exempt as investigative record but SSOSA evaluation not exempt.
- This Court holds neither VIS nor SSOSA evaluation qualifies as an investigative record under RCW 42.56.240(1).
- Remand for reasonable attorney fees and penalties under RCW 42.56.550(4) is required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether VIS is an investigative record under PRA | Koenig contends VIS is investigative | Thurston County argues VIS is investigative | VIS not an investigative record |
| Whether SSOSA evaluation is an investigative record under PRA | Koenig contends SSOSA is investigative | Thurston County argues SSOSA is not investigative | SSOSA evaluation not an investigative record |
Key Cases Cited
- Dawson v. Daly, 120 Wn.2d 782 (1993) (defense-witness cross-examination records not investigative records under PRA)
- Cowles Publ’g Co. v. Wash. State Patrol, 109 Wn.2d 712 (1988) (investigative records exemption applies when records are essential to law enforcement or privacy)
- Progressive Animal Welfare Soc’y v. Univ. of Wash., 125 Wn.2d 243 (1994) (liberal PRA interpretation with exemptions narrowly construed)
- Spokane Police Dep’t, 139 Wn.2d 472 (1999) (investigative records exemption principles in policing context)
- State v. Gentry, 125 Wn.2d 570 (1995) (victim impact statements role in sentencing and rights of victims)
- Newman v. King County, 133 Wn.2d 565 (1997) (reasoning on purpose of records and PRA exemptions)