Karl Koch VS Honorable H. Charles Gaudin In His Capacity As the Chairman of the Louisiana Gaming Control Board

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 CA 0671 KARL KOCH VS HONORABLE H CHARLES GAUDIN CHAIRMAN OF THE LOUISIANA GAMING CONTROL BOARD JUDGMENT RENDERED rdY if Ir VlfYI NOV 7 2007 ON APPEAL FROM THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT DOCKET NUMBER 445 550 DIVISION D PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA HONORABLE JANICE CLARK JUDGE KARL J KOCH PLAINTIFF APPELLANT IN PROPER PERSON BATON ROUGE LA THOMAS A WARNER III ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT APPELLEE BATON ROUGE LA HONORABLE CHARLES GAUDIN IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHAIRMAN OF LOUISIANA GAMING CONTROL BOARD C ATTORNEY FOR INTERVENORS APPELLEES LAWRENCE ORLANSKY PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT KATHRYN M KNIGHT BATON ROUGE LA l fijrr L 7 Ar BEFORE INC PNK DEVELOPMENT 8 L L C MICHAEL W MCKAY AND PNK DEVELOPMENT 9 L LC J o lfJ wdh 1k f2 7201C6er J ftR ih 07 GAIDRY MCDONALD AND MCCLENDON JJ MCDONALD J This appeal Judicial District Court public records of the trial following denying plaintiff court judgment a from the Nineteenth documents to access For the subject to disclosure alleged to be the judgment following reasons is affirmed Karl J Koch Koch Appellant the filed was submitted a public records request to Gaming Control Board of the Office of the Attorney General Board for all parts of the permission Board to application berth responded under the a new that disclosure but Koch R S La were confidential statutorily prohibited from of all other requested documents the Board inspection 27 21 A 2 and seeking Rouge Parish The requested of the documents provided copies wrote to withhold from riverboat casino in East Baton some provision of Pinnacle of Pinnacle Entertainment Inc requesting reconsideration of its decision of Pinnacle some s application and additionally requesting all correspondence between the Board and Pinnacle relating their proposal to locate a riverboat casino within East Baton and any records of the Board portion of Pinnacle with the s pertaining application Attorney General s to the decision documents law pertaining of Pinnacle s from to to Rouge Parish withhold any The Board advised that after consultation office and careful review of the documents deemed confidential it had determined that the prohibited by to to disclosure but communications requested provided documents fourteen addressing whether were of pages any portions application should be withheld from public disclosure as requested by Koch Shortly thereafter Koch filed a petition in district court seeking mandamus directing the Chairman of the Board to produce Pinnacle application and also to be ordered to pay costs 2 of the a s entire proceedings The Board filed motion for a documents which the berth site hearing exhibit D the on the matter be disclosed assignments of and source judgment not declining to the staffing plan impact report was rendered disclosable to award Koch public submitted were to Rouge the trial s 44 31B 3 subj ect custodian the trial court and to and proprietary and should his burden of proving that the materials and 2 records conectly that the right to public ened in finding that the District Court at two the issue ened in plaintiff court costs right to provides asserts that s goverrunental copying by not or exceptions a He also notes that La proving that are a public record is reproduction shall meet in Louisiana is strong presumption in favor introducing evidence records failed to The records of the Board public records records that the burden of inspection custodian of the Board with statutory were that Koch be allowed met view public ordering Court of the a for the Baton the District statutory and there is that drawing of appeals this judgment alleging both constitutional and not a 1 enor Koch argues R S Exhibit A court D but that exhibits A and F custodian of the record were by the trial economic an inspection of the withheld confidential inspection of the confidential documents by inspect exhibit not camera under seal After to in ordered was project and exhibit F court an at with the rest the hearing the his burden of proof deemed open to public record disclosure Louisiana Revised Statute 27 21A 2 provides record of the board shall be confidential when the record relates to certain enumerated information which the Board found of the information requested by was conect in After inspection whether the Board requested records Koch applicable The issue before the trial to court maintaining the confidentiality of the documents 3 at some was of the issue the trial court concluded that the Board had with the exercised its properly legislative mandate and that some of the records We agree with the Board that the documents confidentiality and do trial find any not error authority in accordance were confidential the best evidence of their are in the conclusion reached by the court Koch further argues that since he of infonnation that was citizen who find his was forced withheld from the improperly burden associated with the proceeding to resort to successful in was the should courts not be assigned a him to right a We court determined that each The relevant costs own public the financial for vindication of argument persuasive however the trial party should bear its forcing disclosure statute La RS 44 35D provides If a the right to inspect or prevails in such suit seeking person copy of a public record awarded reasonable attorney s to receive he fees and other costs of a shall be litigation If such person prevails in part the court may in its discretion award him reasonable attorney s fees or an appropriate portion thereof In this matter Koch has In accordance with the statute prevailed in part trial court may exercise its discretion to award reasonable but the statute makes Koch relies 1984 wherein no on partial reference Lewis access but all costs in the trial and The distinction defendant was required The fourth circuit reversed was subj ect to the public records appellate 456 So 2d 206 was courts ordered were to disclose any finding that some of the to appellate to court court the defendant found that the requested information be disclosed and ordered In the matter before 4 the Cir records and dismissed the suit records law and had the defendant to pay all costs by App 4th La assessed is that in Lewis the trial however not to fees s to costs Spurney v attorney the us the trial court ordered the release of decision some We find The of the no basis requested information to reverse court s we are affirming assessment costs is issued in accordance with Unifonn Rules Courts of Appeal Rule 2 16 1B Costs of this appeal are court is affirmed and this of its opinion judgment of the trial the trial and assessed to Karl J Koch AFFIRMED 5

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.