North Kansas City Hosp. Bd. of Trustees v. St. Luke's Northland Hosp.

Decision Date03 November 1998
Docket NumberNo. WD,WD
Citation984 S.W.2d 113
PartiesNORTH KANSAS CITY HOSPITAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent, v. ST. LUKE'S NORTHLAND HOSPITAL, Appellant. 54167.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Allan V. Hallquist, Peter Sloan, David L. Rein, Jr., Blackwell Sanders Matheny Weary & Lombardi, Kansas City, for appellant.

William E. Quirk, Shughart Thomson & Kilroy, W. James Foland, Foland & Wickens, Kansas City, respondent.

Before ELLIS, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and RIEDERER, JJ.

ELLIS, Presiding Judge.

On July 31, 1996, James M. Brophy, president and chief executive officer of St. Luke's Northland Hospital, sent a letter to the North Kansas City Hospital Board of Trustees making 24 different requests for documents under Missouri's Sunshine Law §§ 610.010 to 610.032. 1 The specific information requested is reflected in Appendix A at the end of this opinion. Generally, the requested documents related to (1) the Board of Trustee's involvement in a condemnation proceeding between St. Luke's and the city of Smithville over St. Luke's Smithville campus and (2) the general operation of North Kansas City Hospital and "related entities."

On August 6, 1996, Michael E. Payne, President of NKC Hospital, as custodian of all hospital records, sent St. Luke's a letter granting access to some of the requested documents but denying a majority of the requests. The substantive contents of that letter appear in Appendix B at the end of this opinion. The letter generally asserted that access to the records was denied pursuant to § 610.010 et. seq. On August 7, 1996, the Board of Trustees filed an action in the Circuit Court of Clay County requesting a declaratory judgment validating its refusal of access to St. Luke's. Specifically, the Board asked the court to find (1) that NKC Hospital itself was not a "public governmental body;" (2) that certain requested records were not "public records;" and (3) that the actions of the Board in closing the records were proper. The Board also requested an award of attorneys' fees and any other relief that the court deemed just and proper.

The trial court heard the cause on January 16, 1997. At that time, the Board delivered the requested documents to the court for in camera review. At some point prior to the entry of judgment, the Board provided St. Luke's with access to further documents relating to the Smithville campus in response to certain requests. On February 21, 1997, the trial court entered a declaratory judgment in favor of the Board. The court found: (1) The Board and NKC Hospital are distinct entities and that NKC Hospital is not a public governmental agency. Accordingly the court found that those documents which are records of NKC Hospital, not the Board, are not public records; (2) Meritas Health Corporation and any other "related entities" are not quasi-public governmental entities under the Sunshine Law. Accordingly, the Trustees did not have to reveal any documents, contracts, or agreements with any related entity, including but not limited to Meritas and Creekwood Ambulatory Surgery Center; (3) Many of the records requested by St. Luke's were properly closed because they were protected from disclosure by law under Missouri and U.S. antitrust statutes, the Missouri Trade Secrets Act, common law relating to trade secrets and the Constitutional right to privacy. Based on these findings, the trial court held that the Board had fully complied with the provisions of the Sunshine Law.

In its first point, St. Luke's claims the trial court erred in finding that NKC Hospital was not a "public governmental body" and that the documents retained by the hospital were therefore not "public records." While conceding that it is itself a public governmental body, the Board of Trustees maintains that the hospital is a separate entity, that the operation of a hospital is not governmental, and that the hospital's records are not subject to the provisions of the Sunshine Law.

The trial court accepted the Board's arguments, expressly finding that the Trustees do not control the day-to-day operation of NKC Hospital, hire physicians or nurses, enter into managed care contracts, hire consultants, or take care of sick people. The court found that these were things that NKC Hospital does as a separate entity in day-to-day operation of the hospital. The court found that the documents related to the day-to-day operation of the hospital do not "rise to the level" of the Board of Trustees, and were therefore not "retained by or of" the Board of Trustees. The trial court found that North Kansas City Hospital was a separate entity from the Board of Trustees that does not "govern" anyone or anything, does not operate as a legislative or administrative governmental body, and is not deliberative in nature. The court found that the hospital does not have rule-making power and it is not quasi-judicial. Based on these findings, the trial court concluded that North Kansas City Hospital was not a "public governmental body" and its records were not subject to the Sunshine Law.

Both the trial court and the Board rely heavily on Tribune Publishing Co. v. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 661 S.W.2d 575 (Mo.App. W.D.1983), for the proposition that the governing board of an institution and the institution itself are separate entities and that the institution itself is not a public governmental body. Their reliance is misplaced. Tribune is readily distinguishable. Tribune held that the Board of Curators of the University of Missouri is sui generis and by the mandate found in Article IX, § 9(a) of the Missouri Constitution, is a separate entity from the university itself. Id. at 579. The constitutional mandate significantly differentiated the Board of Curators from a normal corporate board of directors. Id. No such constitutional mandate comes into play with regard to the Board of Trustees of North Kansas City Hospital. Furthermore, in determining that the university itself was not a public governmental body, the Tribune court construed a definition of "public governmental body" from an earlier version of the Sunshine Law which did not encompass administrative governmental entities. Tipton v. Barton, 747 S.W.2d 325, 329 (Mo.App. E.D.1988). Since Tribune, the Legislature has amended the Sunshine Law to, among other things, expand the definition of "public governmental body" to specifically include administrative or executive bodies. Id.

Section 610.010(4) currently provides that a "public governmental body" is:

[A]ny legislative, administrative or governmental entity created by the constitution or statutes of this state, by order or ordinance of any political subdivision or district, judicial entities when operating in an administrative capacity, or by executive order, including ... [a]ny department or division of the state, of any political subdivision of the state, of any county or of any municipal government, school district or special purpose district including but not limited to sewer districts, water districts and other subdivisions of any political subdivision.

The city of North Kansas City is clearly a public governmental body within the provisions of § 610.010(4), and the Board of Trustees readily concedes that it is itself a public governmental body. However, the Board contends, and the trial court agreed, that the hospital is a separate entity that has an existence of its own and is not a public governmental body. We disagree. It is conceded that NKC Hospital is a Chapter 96 hospital. As such, it is not a separate entity from its creator city. Younger v. Missouri Pub. Entity Risk, 957 S.W.2d 332, 338 (Mo.App. W.D.1997) (citing State ex rel. Bd. of Trustees of North Kansas City Mem'l Hosp. v. Russell, 843 S.W.2d 353, 357 (Mo. banc 1992)). The city's operation of a municipal hospital is a governmental function just like any other action of the city and there is no reason to distinguish a city hospital as a separate entity from the city. Id. at 337-38 (citing Zummo v. Kansas City, 285 Mo. 222, 225 S.W. 934, 937 (Mo.1920)).

The Board of Trustees is merely a part of the city government (just like the mayor, the city council, zoning commissions, boards of adjustment, park boards, and boards created to operate municipally owned utilities) created by statute to provide the city with a means of operating its hospital. Russell, 843 S.W.2d at 357. 2 The Board has the authority to operate, maintain and manage a hospital; to make and enter into contracts, for the use, operation or management of the hospital; to make and enter into leases of equipment and real property; and to provide rules and regulations for the operation, management or use of the hospital. § 96.150.5. The employees of the hospital are city employees. Younger, 957 S.W.2d at 338. To the extent the Board of Trustees does not conduct the "day-to-day operations" of the hospital, that function is performed by a city employee who has been granted the authority to do so by the Board.

A "public record" under the Sunshine Law is any record retained by any public governmental body. City of Springfield v. Events Publishing, 951 S.W.2d 366, 371 (Mo.App. S.D.1997). "The emphasis is not on the nature of the document, but on who prepared or retains the record." Id.

The Board operates the hospital for the city. Russell, 843 S.W.2d at 357. The Board appointed the President of NKC Hospital, a city employee, to be the custodian of the hospital's records. 3 Therefore, the President, the Board of Trustees and the city all have legal control over the hospital records. Tipton, 747 S.W.2d at 329. Accordingly, the records are "retained" by a public governmental body. 4 Id. As a result, the records of North Kansas City Hospital are public records under the Sunshine Law.

St. Luke's next challenges the trial court's determination that ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Transit Casualty Co. v. Intervening Employees
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 6 Marzo 2001
    ...employment contracts is not likely to significantly jeopardize the privacy of employees." North Kansas City Hosp. Bd. of Trustees v. St. Luke's Northland Hosp., 984 S.W.2d 113, 122 (Mo. App. 1998). Neither the SDR nor TCCR cite, and we are not aware of, any policy to the contrary merely bec......
  • Nat'l Council of Teachers Quality, Inc. v. Curators of the Univ. of Mo.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 26 Agosto 2014
    ...records pursuant to the Sunshine Law would violate the subject law.5 For example, in North Kansas City Hospital Board of Trustees v. St. Luke's Northland Hospital, 984 S.W.2d 113 (Mo.App.1998), the circuit court held that requested records were exempt from disclosure under Section 610.021(1......
  • R.E.J. Inc. v. City of Sikeston, 25250.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 29 Octubre 2003
    ...state's commitment to open government and is to be liberally construed in favor of that purpose. North Kansas City Hosp. v. St. Luke's Northland Hosp., 984 S.W.2d 113, 119[5] (Mo.App. 1998). 3. The Sunshine Law provides for a number of remedies "in addition to those provided by any other pr......
  • Davis v. Bd. of Trs. of N. Kan. City Hosp., Case No. 14-0625-CV-W-ODS
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • 2 Marzo 2015
    ...created by statute to provide the city with a means of operating its hospital." North Kansas City Hosp. Bd. of Trustees v. St. Luke's Northland Hosp., 984 S.W.2d 113, 117 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).6 And, significantly for present purposes, "[t]he employees of the hospital are city employees." Id.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Missouri. Practice Text
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library State Antitrust Practice and Statutes (FIFTH). Volume II
    • 9 Diciembre 2014
    ...have indicated a 47. 465 U.S. 752 (1984). 48. Id. at 768. 49. Id. 50. N. Kan. City Hosp. Bd. of Trs. v. St. Luke’s Northland Hosp., 984 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998) (quoting a passage from Fisher v. City of Berkeley, 475 U.S. 260, 266 (1986), which contained a citation to Monsanto ).......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT