University of Kentucky v. Lachin Hatemi, M.D.
2019 CA 000731
| Ky. Ct. App. | Nov 5, 2021Background:
- Dr. Lachin Hatemi requested (Jan. 19, 2016) meeting minutes for a faculty group variously called the "UK Healthcare Faculty Compensation Planning Committee." UK’s records custodian replied that no responsive minutes exist after a reasonable search.
- Hatemi sought review from the Attorney General (AAG). The AAG went beyond the limited Open Records Act review, investigated whether the faculty group was a “public agency” under the Open Meetings Act, and concluded the group was a public agency that had failed to create/retain minutes.
- UK appealed the AG decision to Fayette Circuit Court under KRS 61.882(1); the circuit court affirmed the AG’s finding that the group was a public agency but also found as a fact the group never recorded minutes and dismissed Hatemi’s counterclaim for willful withholding.
- On appeal to the Court of Appeals, the panel held the AAG exceeded her authority by adjudicating nonjusticiable Open Meetings Act issues and the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to decide Open Meetings Act violations because the parties had not invoked KRS 61.848(1).
- Because the circuit court correctly found the requested minutes never existed, the court also correctly dismissed Hatemi’s claim of willful withholding under KRS 61.882(5); that holding was affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hatemi) | Defendant's Argument (UK) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the AAG properly adjudicate whether the faculty group was a public agency and whether minutes should have existed? | The AAG may resolve whether minutes existed and whether the group was a public agency in an ORD. | The AAG exceeded her authority by investigating Open Meetings Act issues and resolving factual questions beyond the written request/denial. | AAG exceeded authority; AG opinion reversed insofar as it adjudicated Open Meetings Act/public-agency status. |
| Who bears the burden when an agency says requested records do not exist? | Hatemi argued the records should exist (relied on committee references). | UK argued Bowling requires requestor to make a prima facie showing that records existed before the agency must do more. | Court reiterated Bowling: requester must make prima facie showing; UK met its duty by a reasonable search; AG should not have required further inquiry. |
| Did the circuit court have subject matter jurisdiction to decide Open Meetings Act claims and declare the group a public agency? | Hatemi treated the AG ruling as proper and the issue as ripe for judicial review. | UK invoked only KRS 61.882(1) (Open Records Act jurisdiction); it did not invoke KRS 61.848(1) (Open Meetings Act jurisdiction). | Circuit court lacked jurisdiction to rule on Open Meetings Act/public-agency issue; that part of its order is void and reversed. |
| Was UK’s failure to produce minutes a willful withholding under KRS 61.882(5)? | Hatemi contended UK willfully withheld records and discovery was insufficient. | UK showed the minutes never existed and conducted a good-faith search. | Circuit court’s dismissal of willful-withholding claim affirmed; cannot willfully withhold records that never existed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bowling v. Lexington-Fayette Urb. Cty. Gov’t, 172 S.W.3d 333 (Ky. 2005) (when agency denies existence of records, requester must make a prima facie showing that records exist before further inquiry or an evidentiary hearing).
- City of Fort Thomas v. Cincinnati Enquirer, 406 S.W.3d 842 (Ky. 2013) (de novo judicial review of AG ORD decisions; court not bound by the AG decision and not limited to the administrative record).
- Todd Cty. Standard, Inc. v. Cabinet for Health & Family Servs., 488 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. App. 2015) (AG may seek additional agency substantiation where agency is clearly obligated to create records; contrasts encourageable facts justifying AG inquiries).
- Puckett v. Cabinet for Health & Family Servs., 621 S.W.3d 402 (Ky. 2021) (a judgment entered by a court lacking subject-matter jurisdiction is void).
- Lexington Herald-Leader Co. v. Univ. of Ky. Presidential Search Comm., 732 S.W.2d 884 (Ky. 1987) (committees appointed by formal board action are public agencies for purposes of open records/meetings analysis).