Houghton v. Franscell
This Ballotpedia article needs to be updated.
This Ballotpedia article is currently under review by Ballotpedia staff as it may contain out-of-date information. Please email us if you would like to suggest an update.
 |
This Open Records and Transparency Project article is a sprout. You can help us collect information about this case, and other important FOIA cases across the country, by expanding this article. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sunshine Laws |
| How to Make Records Requests |
| Sunshine Litigation |
| Sorted by State, Year and Topic |
| Sunshine Nuances |
| Deliberative Process Exemption |
Houghton v. Franscell was a case before the Wyoming Supreme Court in 1994 concerning the hospital record exemption within Wyoming law(Statute 16-4-203(d)).
Important precedents
This case determined that the hospital records exemption found in Wyoming statute 16-4-203(d)(vii) should be narrowly construed to include only those records of the day to day business of the hospital with regard to the health of the patients.
Background
- On October 22, 1992, The Gillette News-Record requested a physician recruitment contract which contained information on promised pay and benefits for a potential physician.
- Campbell County Hospital District denied access to the record based on the exemption in Wyoming law 16-4-203(d)(vii).
- The newspaper filed suit on January 25, 1993 and on April 22, 1993 the district court ruled in favor of the newspaper and ordered the records disclosed.
- The hospital appealed the decision.[1]
Ruling of the court
The court begins by citing Sheridan Newspapers v. City of Sheridan, which states that absent a compelling interest, entire classes of records cannot be considered exempt under statute but must be determined on a case by case basis. Thus, the basis of denial must be explicitly contained in the statute. The court rules that hospital records are those records which are kept by a hospital concerning its day to day operations of treating patients[1]. The court finds that the intention of this exemption is to protect private records of patients and doctors and prevent an unwarranted invasion of privacy. In addition to this, the court liberally construes the intention of the public records act stating that, " an open and accountable government is particularly important with respect to the expenditure of public funds"[1]." Considering all these factors the court ruled in favor of the newspaper and ordered the contract released.
