TONY GRAVES v. TOMPKINSVILLE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT TONY GRAVES v. HONORABLE PAUL BARRY JONES, JUDGE MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED:
November 7, 1997; 10:00 a.m.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
NO. 97-CA-000228-MR
TONY GRAVES
v.
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM MONROE CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE PAUL BARRY JONES, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 96-CI-00099
TOMPKINSVILLE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND
NO. 97-CA-000229-MR
TONY GRAVES
v.
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM MONROE CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE PAUL BARRY JONES, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 96-CI-00091
MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
OPINION
AFFIRMING
* * * * * * * *
BEFORE:
APPELLEE
EMBERTON, HUDDLESTON and MILLER, Judges.
APPELLEE
EMBERTON, JUDGE.
This opinion addresses two appeals by Tony
Graves from orders of Monroe Circuit Court denying his request
for declaratory judgment.1
Appellant seeks a declaration that
the Tompkinsville City Police Department willfully and blatantly
disregarded the statutory provisions of the Open Records Act,
injunctive relief requiring a proper response to appellant’s open
records request, and monetary awards as provided under Ky. Rev.
Stat. (KRS) 61.882(5).
We affirm.
On May 30, 1996, appellant made a request under the
Open Records Act, KRS 61.870 to 61.884, requesting that the
Tompkinsville City Police Department provide him with copies of
various records relating to arrests and convictions of Alex
Tooley.
Under KRS 61.880(1) appellee was under a duty to respond
to the request within three days; however, it failed to do so.
Appellant then requested, pursuant to KRS 61.880, that the
Attorney General’s office review and intervene in the matter.
On
June 18, 1996, the Attorney General’s office contacted appellee
concerning its failure to respond to the open records request.
Subsequently, appellee issued a letter stating that the requested
records were not in its possession and identifying the actual
custodian of the records as the Monroe County Circuit Court
Clerk.
On July 18, 1996, the Attorney General issued an Open
1
Appellant filed two petitions in circuit court requesting
substantially identical relief. The motions were docketed as two
separate cases, 96-CI-00091 and 96-CI-00099. Inasmuch as the
issues raised are identical, this opinion addresses the appeals
together.
-2-
Records Decision wherein it found that although appellee’s
response to the open records request was procedurally deficient,
it was substantively correct.
On July 29, 1996, and on August 7,
1996, appellant filed petitions for declaratory relief in Monroe
Circuit Court.
On January 8, 1997, the trial court issued orders
separately denying the two petitions.
Graves separately appealed
these orders.
Graves requests a declaration that the Tompkinsville
Police Department “willfully and blatantly disregarded the
statutory provisions as set forth in KRS 61.972.”
In its orders
denying appellant’s petitions, the trial court states,
the court agrees with the decision of the
Attorney General that [appellee] did act in a
'substantively correct' manner and did not
act in 'blatant disregard' of the Open
Records Act. Consequently, this Court will
not issue any declaration to the effect that
the [appellee] 'willfully and blatantly'
disregarded the provisions of the Open
Records Act . . . since [appellee] did not
willfully withhold any records in its
possession.
Inasmuch as the trial court's order constitutes
findings of fact with respect to the alleged willful and blatant
conduct of appellee, such findings of fact should be reviewed
pursuant to the "clearly erroneous" standard found in
CR 52.01.
Beckham v. Board of Educ. of Jefferson County, Ky., 873 S.W.2d
575, 579 (1994).
The trial court’s findings that appellee did
not engage in willful and blatant conduct by failing to timely
respond to appellant’s open records request was not clearly
-3-
erroneous and we accordingly affirm that finding.
Appellant next requests injunctive relief requiring
that appellee properly respond to his open records request.
It
is apparent that appellee, though its response was not timely,
has otherwise properly responded to appellant’s request.
KRS
61.872(3) provides that “if the person to whom the application is
directed does not have custody or control of the public record
requested, such person shall so notify the applicant and shall
furnish the name and location of the custodian of the public
record, if such facts are known to him.”
In its letter dated
June 25, 1996, appellee stated that it was not the custodian of
the records being requested and identified the Monroe County
Circuit Court as the custodian of the records sought by
appellant.
A public agency properly responds to a request for
inspection if it truthfully states it does not have the requested
records.
The trial court concluded that there is no evidence in
the record to prove that the Tompkinsville Police Department's
response was untruthful.
CR 52.01.
This finding was not clearly erroneous.
The appellee having properly responded to appellant’s
request, appellant's prayer for injunctive relief is without
merit.
Last, pursuant to KRS 61.882, appellant requests an
award of $25.00 per day for each day he was denied the right to
inspect or copy the requested records.
However, to qualify for
such award, the statute requires a “finding that the records were
-4-
willfully withheld.” KRS 61.882(5).
The trial court specifically
found that appellee did not act willfully.
The trial court’s orders are affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
-5-
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE
IN 97-CA-0228-MR:
Tony Graves, pro se
Marion Adjustment Center
St. Mary, Kentucky
A. Thomas Davis
Tompkinsville, Kentucky
NO BRIEF FILED FOR APPELLEE
IN 97-CA-0229-MR
-6-
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.