Andrews v. Wash. State Patrol

• Citation: 334 P.3d 94,183 Wash.App. 644
• Decision Date: 16 September 2014
• Docket Number: No. 32288–2–III.,32288–2–III.
• Court: Court of Appeals of Washington
• Parties: John ANDREWS, Appellant, v. WASHINGTON STATE PATROL, Respondent.

183 Wash.App. 644
334 P.3d 94

John ANDREWS, Appellant,
v.
WASHINGTON STATE PATROL, Respondent.

No. 32288–2–III.

Court of Appeals of Washington,
Division 3.

Sept. 16, 2014.

Affirmed.

[334 P.3d 95]

John Claire Andrews, Attorney at Law, Bremerton, WA, for Appellant.

Shelley Anne Williams, Attorney General Office, Seattle, WA, for Respondent.

LAWRENCE–BERREY, J.

¶ 1 RCW 42.56.100 requires that an agency responding to public records requests provide “the fullest assistance to inquirers and the most timely possible action on requests for information.” Some agencies are beleaguered with several hundred or even thousands of public records requests in a short period of time. When an agency, despite acting diligently, fails to comply with its self-imposed deadlines, a question arises: Should courts apply rigid rules that penalize a diligent but late response, or may courts take a flexible approach?

¶ 2 We determine that a flexible approach that focuses upon the thoroughness and diligence of an agency's response is most consistent with the concept of “fullest assistance,” We, therefore, affirm the trial court's summary judgment order in favor of the Washington State Patrol (WSP).

FACTS

¶ 3 After discovering that some attorney-client telephone conversations were being recorded in a WSP breath alcohol concentration room, John Andrews submitted a public records request on March 8, 2012, seeking the following:

All of the following requests are limited to WSP District One office from January 1, 2009 involving [driving under the influence] suspect/defendant

1. Policies or procedures regarding recording attorney-client telephone conversations

2. Copy of all recorded attorney-client telephone conversations

3. Copies of any documents authorizing the WSP to record attorney-client phone calls

4. Copies of phone records of all lines on which attorney-client telephone conversations have been recorded

Clerk's Papers (CP) at 6.

¶ 4 On March 15, 2012, the WSP sent Mr. Andrews an initial response letter that acknowledged the request and estimated about 20 days to produce responsive records. On April 11, 2012, the WSP's public records officer, Gretchen Dolan, sent Mr. Andrews an e-mail that extended the estimated response period for another 20 days. In her message, she explained that “[a]dditional time is required to research this request, notify involved parties, and/or prepare records for dissemination.” CP at 8. Mr. Andrews left messages with Ms. Dolan about the delay. Ms. Dolan did not return his telephone calls. Ms. Dolan did not send another extension letter on May 1, 2012. This oversight was due to the volume of pending public records requests. Between January 1, 2012, and March 8, 2012, the WSP had received approximately 2,307 public records requests and subpoenas duces tecum and, since March 15, 2012, it had received an additional 1,882 such requests.

¶ 5 On May 3, 2012, Mr. Andrews filed a lawsuit against the WSP for violation of the

[334 P.3d 96]

Public Records Act (PRA), chapter 42.56 RCW, alleging the WSP had “failed to produce records after its own time estimates” and had not “provided a reasonable estimate of time to produce the records [or] provided the fullest assistance.” CP at 4. The WSP responded on May 9, 2012, and estimated it could produce the records by May 31, 2012. It explained that due in part to the sensitivity of the potentially confidential records, the search was more complex than initially contemplated.

¶ 6 The WSP later detailed the complexity of the search, noting that Ms. Dolan gathered the language line billing records from October 2011 ¹ to March 2012, computer aided dispatch (CAD) records from October 2011 to March 2012, the police officers' incident reports from the time and dates listed in the language line billing records, and the digital recordings. Ms. Dolan then reviewed the incident reports that corresponded to the digital recordings to determine whether the officer noted that the suspect was connected with an attorney. To preserve the confidentiality of the attorney-client conversation, WSP personnel were instructed not to listen to these recordings as they searched for records. Based on this review, Ms. Dolan learned the language line, which provides an interpreter to translate implied consent warnings or other information to a person suspected of driving under the influence, had been called 39 times for about 30 arrests.² Ms. Dolan then located four incident reports that referenced calls to an attorney.

¶ 7 As of May 8, 2012, Ms. Dolan was still waiting for information regarding whether other language line calls involved communications between a suspect and an attorney. The WSP explained that it was waiting for two recordings from District 1's dispatch, two recordings from the District 1's direct line to the language line, and five incident reports to review for references of connecting the suspect to an attorney. The WSP also noted that with respect to Mr. Andrews's request for policies and procedures for recording attorney-client telephone conversations, Ms. Dolan had researched the WSP regulation manual and asked personnel in the Field Operations Bureau and the Communications Division whether they had responsive records. On May 25, 2012, the WSP provided a complete response to the request for records, together with a detailed redaction log.

¶ 8 On December 19, 2012, the WSP moved for summary judgment dismissal of Mr. Andrews's lawsuit, arguing that the PRA lacks any provision that expressly requires an agency to produce public records by the agency's estimated response date. In its memorandum in support of summary judgment, it also pointed out that the WSP's meticulous search to identify responsive records justified extending the deadline and that, ultimately, it took less than 90 days to disclose the responsive documents. The WSP stated that seven WSP...