2020 Georgia Code
Title 50 - State Government
Chapter 18 - State Printing and Documents
Article 4 - Inspection of Public Records
§ 50-18-70. Legislative Intent; Definitions

1. The General Assembly finds and declares that the strong public policy of this state is in favor of open government; that open government is essential to a free, open, and democratic society; and that public access to public records should be encouraged to foster confidence in government and so that the public can evaluate the expenditure of public funds and the efficient and proper functioning of its institutions. The General Assembly further finds and declares that there is a strong presumption that public records should be made available for public inspection without delay. This article shall be broadly construed to allow the inspection of governmental records. The exceptions set forth in this article, together with any other exception located elsewhere in the Code, shall be interpreted narrowly to exclude only those portions of records addressed by such exception.
2. As used in this article, the term:
   1. "Agency" shall have the same meaning as in Code Section 50-14-1 and shall additionally include any association, corporation, or other similar organization that has a membership or ownership body composed primarily of counties, municipal corporations, or school districts of this state, their officers, or any combination thereof and derives more than 33 1/3 percent of its general operating budget from payments from such political subdivisions.
   2. "Public record" means all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, computer based or generated information, data, data fields, or similar material prepared and maintained or received by an agency or by a private person or entity in the performance of a service or function for or on behalf of an agency or when such documents have been transferred to a private person or entity by an agency for storage or future governmental use.

(Ga. L. 1959, p. 88, § 1; Code 1981, §50-18-70; Ga. L. 1982, p. 1789, § 1; Ga. L. 1988, p. 243, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 1061, § 5; Ga. L. 1992, p. 1545, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2829, § 2; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1394, § 2; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1436, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1994, p. 618, § 1; Ga. L. 1998, p. 128, § 50; Ga. L. 1999, p. 552, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 2012, p. 173, § 1-38/HB 665; Ga. L. 2012, p. 218, § 2/HB 397.)

The 2012 amendments. The first 2012 amendment, effective July 1, 2012, in subsection (c), substituted "Except as provided in subsection (b) of Code Section 15-6-61, any" for "Any" at the beginning and inserted "or made available through electronic means" twice. The second 2012 amendment, effective April 17, 2012, rewrote this Code section. See the Code Commission note regarding the effect of these amendments.

- Right of shareholders to inspect books and records of corporations, § 14-2-1602.

Confidentiality of records relating to adoption proceedings, § 19-8-18.

Opening of primary and election records of Secretary of State for inspection by public, § 21-2-51.

Opening of primary and election records of election superintendents for inspection by public, § 21-2-72.

Disclosure and publication of vital records, § 31-10-25.

Inspection of motor vehicle records, § 40-3-24.

Confidentiality of reports, files, and other documents, relating to probation, § 42-8-40.

Confidentiality of records of State Board of Pardons and Paroles, § 42-9-53.

Limited disclosure of autopsy photographs, § 45-16-27.

Confidentiality of income tax information, §§ 48-7-60,48-7-61.

- For article discussing the right of access to public records of local government, see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 97 (1978). For article, "Informational Privacy Under the Open Records Act," see 32 Mercer L. Rev. 393 (1980). For article surveying developments in Georgia local government law from mid-1980 through mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 187 (1981). For annual survey of administrative law, see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 17 (1986). For annual survey of state and local taxation, see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 337 (1986). For annual survey on local government law, see 42 Mercer L. Rev. 359 (1990). For annual survey of local government law, see 44 Mercer L. Rev. 309 (1992). For survey article on administrative law for the period from June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1999, see 51 Mercer L. Rev. 103 (1999). For annual survey article discussing developments in education law, see 52 Mercer L. Rev. 221 (2000). For article, "General Overview of Procurement Process," see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 12 (2005). For annual survey of administrative law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 1 (2005). For annual survey of local government law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 289 (2005). For annual survey of criminal law, see 58 Mercer L. Rev. 83 (2006). For annual survey of zoning and land use law, see 58 Mercer L. Rev. 477 (2006). For survey article on local government law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 285 (2007). For survey article on zoning and land use law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 493 (2007). For survey article on local government law, see 60 Mercer L. Rev. 263 (2008). For article on the 2012 amendment of this Code section, see 29 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 139 (2012). For annual survey on administrative law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 39 (2012). For annual survey on trial practice and procedure, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 305 (2012). For article, "Prison Accountability and Performance Measures," see 63 Emory L. J. 339 (2013). For annual survey on local government law, see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 199 (2016). For annual survey on local government law, see 70 Mercer L. Rev. 177 (2018). For note on 1992 amendment of this Code section, see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 344 (1992). For note on the 1994 amendment of this Code section, see 11 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 265 (1994). For note on 1999 amendment to this Code section, see 16 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 262 (1999). For note on 1999 amendment to this Code section, see 16 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 268 (1999).

ANALYSIS

• General Consideration
• Public Records
• Balancing of Interests
• Exceptions

General Consideration

Legislative intent.

- General Assembly did not intend that all public records of law enforcement officers and officials be open for inspection by a citizen as soon as such records are prepared. Houston v. Rutledge, 237 Ga. 764, 229 S.E.2d 624 (1976).

Intent of General Assembly was to afford to public at large access to public records with the exceptions of certain information which is exempt from disclosure. Griffin-Spalding County Hosp. Auth. v. Radio Station WKEU, 240 Ga. 444, 241 S.E.2d 196 (1978).

- Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., does not permit recovery of compensatory or punitive damages. Wallace v. Greene County, 274 Ga. App. 776, 618 S.E.2d 642 (2005).

Purpose of inspection of government documents provisions is not only to encourage public access to information in order that the public can evaluate the expenditure of public funds and the efficient and proper functioning of its institutions, but also to foster confidence in government through openness to the public. Athens Observer, Inc. v. Anderson, 245 Ga. 63, 263 S.E.2d 128 (1980) (see O.C.G.A. Art. 4, Ch. 18, T. 50).

Purpose of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. Art. 4, Ch. 18, T. 50, is to encourage public access to government information and to foster confidence in government through openness to the public. McFrugal Rental of Riverdale, Inc. v. Garr, 262 Ga. 369, 418 S.E.2d 60 (1992).

- Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., provides the jurisdictional basis for a cause of action by individuals to enjoin the disclosure of legally protected information. Bowers v. Shelton, 265 Ga. 247, 453 S.E.2d 741 (1995).

- Any purported statutory exemption from disclosure under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., must be narrowly construed. Hardaway Co. v. Rives, 262 Ga. 631, 422 S.E.2d 854 (1992).

- In suits under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., the first inquiry is whether the records are "public records"; if the records are, the second inquiry is whether the records are protected from disclosure under the list of exemptions or under any other statute; if the records are not exempt, then the question is whether the records should be protected by court order, but only if there is a claim that disclosure would invade individual privacy. Hardaway Co. v. Rives, 262 Ga. 631, 422 S.E.2d 854 (1992).

If a person or an agency having custody of the records fails to affirmatively respond to an open records request within three business days by notifying the requesting party of the determination as to whether access will be granted, the Georgia Open Records Act (ORA), O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., has been violated; under such circumstances, the person or agency has necessarily failed to grant reasonable access to the files in the person or agency's custody. Wallace v. Greene County, 274 Ga. App. 776, 618 S.E.2d 642 (2005).

- "Diligence" for purposes of habeas corpus does not require that defendants submit multiple, wide-ranging Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1, et seq., requests to every state actor or agency that might possess records pertinent to their cases in order to determine whether the state lived up to the state's disclosure obligations. Watkins v. Ballinger, 308 Ga. 387, 840 S.E.2d 378 (2020).

- City manager (CM) had official immunity in a defamation case under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. IX(d) and O.C.G.A. § 36-33-4 since: (1) the city finance director (FD) did not show that a statement the CM made to the media regarding the CM's concerns in the FD's department was outside the scope of the CM's authority; (2) the CM did not disclose anything to the FD's prospective employer (PE) that the PE did not obtain through a Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., request; and (3) there was no policy that prohibited the CM from verbally responding in conjunction with the CM's Open Records Act response. Smith v. Lott, 317 Ga. App. 37, 730 S.E.2d 663 (2012).

- Fact that some of the newspaper's requests to examine records pertaining to the sheriff's "inmate telephone account," were oral rather than written did not diminish their efficacy under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., for there is no requirement that those requests be in writing. Howard v. Sumter Free Press, Inc., 272 Ga. 521, 531 S.E.2d 698 (2000).

- Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., claim against a county attorney was properly dismissed as no records request was made to the attorney. Wallace v. Greene County, 274 Ga. App. 776, 618 S.E.2d 642 (2005).

- Georgia Secretary of State had standing to object to a request under the Open Records Act for election records held by a county. Under O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-30,21-2-31,21-2-32,21-2-50 et seq., and45-13-20 et seq., the Secretary was charged with the supervision of all elections in Georgia and thus had the right to seek judicial intervention. Smith v. DeKalb County, 288 Ga. App. 574, 654 S.E.2d 469 (2007), cert. denied, No. S08C0596, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 291 (Ga. 2008).

- Custodian of public records complies with an open records request when the custodian grants reasonable access to the files in the custodian's custody; the custodian is not required to comb through the files and locate, inspect, and produce the documents sought. Felker v. Lukemire, 267 Ga. 296, 477 S.E.2d 23 (1996).

- In denying a request for records under the Open Records Act (ORA), O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., an agency was allowed to rely only on the legal authority specified in a response denying an initial request so an insurance commissioner was not allowed to deny an ORA request for records relating to an investigation of an insurer only on the insurer's proffered basis of the pendency of the investigation, and as the insurer had already been given the chance to review the report and resolve the matter, but later withdrew the insurer's request for a hearing, the commissioner's general policy of not releasing reports until the subject of the investigation had a chance to review the report and resolve the matter was unauthorized. Hoffman v. Oxendine, 268 Ga. App. 316, 601 S.E.2d 813 (2004).

- Procedures set forth in O.C.G.A. § 31-6-40 et seq., for consideration of a certificate of need by the Health Planning Agency and appeal to the Health Planning Review Board, establish administrative proceedings within the meaning of O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(d). Clayton County Hosp. Auth. v. Webb, 208 Ga. App. 91, 430 S.E.2d 89 (1993).

- In a suit brought by the plaintiff alleging a violation of the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, et seq., the trial court erred in finding that the doctrine of res judicata barred the plaintiff's action because there was no privity between the plaintiffs in the prior lawsuit and the current action. Sampson v. Ga. Dep't of Juvenile Justice, 328 Ga. App. 733, 760 S.E.2d 203 (2014).

- United States had standing to bring suit in a federal court to recover FBI documents loaned to a city during a homicide investigation, even though a state court had ordered disclosure of the documents pursuant to the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., and some documents had already been disclosed. United States v. Napper, 887 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1989).

- If there has been a request for identifiable public records within the possession of the custodian thereof, the burden is cast on that party to explain why the records should not be furnished. Napper v. Georgia Television Co., 257 Ga. 156, 356 S.E.2d 640 (1987).

- Pendency of a habeas-corpus petition filed by the defendant who was convicted of two of the "Atlanta child murders" did not justify a blanket nondisclosure of the files of other victims which had been introduced to demonstrate a "pattern" among the murders. Napper v. Georgia Television Co., 257 Ga. 156, 356 S.E.2d 640 (1987).

When a habeas court found an inmate's ineffective assistance claim was not procedurally barred, under O.C.G.A. § 9-14-48(d), for failing to raise the claim on direct appeal because the inmate "was not legally permitted to access the criminal records" of two men with the inmate at the time of the murder or of the man to whom the inmate confessed immediately after the murder, under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, until after the inmate completed the direct appeal, this did not overcome procedural bars to raising new claims of ineffective assistance of counsel because it did not specify what "criminal records" had been newly discovered that showed prejudice of constitutional proportions. Schofield v. Meders, 280 Ga. 865, 632 S.E.2d 369 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1126, 127 S. Ct. 958, 166 L. Ed. 2d 729 (2007).

Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia is subject to the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., since the board is an agency of the state. Board of Regents v. Atlanta Journal, 259 Ga. 214, 378 S.E.2d 305 (1989).

Private, nonprofit hospital corporations that served as vehicles through which public hospital authorities carried out their official responsibilities were subject to the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq., and the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Northwest Ga. Health Sys. v. Times-Journal, Inc., 218 Ga. App. 336, 461 S.E.2d 297 (1995).

- Relief sought in a newspaper publisher's suit against a coroner to prohibit the coroner from closing to the public a scheduled inquest was governed by the Open Meetings Law, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq., and the Open Records Law, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Kilgore v. R.W. Page Corp., 259 Ga. 556, 385 S.E.2d 406 (1989).

- Although a database of real estate deed records was a public record within the meaning of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., the clerk of court was not required to create a new program to provide public access with personal computers. Jersawitz v. Hicks, 264 Ga. 553, 448 S.E.2d 352 (1994).

- A 1989 amendment to the insurance code, which exempts certain documents from the open records law, applied to a case which was on appeal at the time the amendment became effective. Evans v. Belth, 193 Ga. App. 757, 388 S.E.2d 914 (1989).

- Judgment dismissing the plaintiff's mandamus action against a city seeking to compel compliance with the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, et seq., was affirmed because the Act's civil penalties provision afforded the plaintiff a remedy as complete and convenient as mandamus by providing its own cause of action for enforcement in O.C.G.A. § 50-18-73(a). Blalock v. Cartwright, 300 Ga. 884, 799 S.E.2d 225 (2017).

Private right of action exists under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, et seq.; thus, mandamus relief is not only unnecessary but improper and, to the extent that cases like Evans v. Georgia Bureau of Investigation, 297 Ga. 318 (773 S.E.2d 725) (2015), suggest otherwise, those cases are disapproved. Blalock v. Cartwright, 300 Ga. 884, 799 S.E.2d 225 (2017).

Request for injunction to force compliance with Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., was premature since, at the time the request was made, the plaintiff retained an adequate legal remedy, namely the right to seek the defendants' records through discovery procedures in the plaintiff's federal action. Millar v. Fayette County Sheriff's Dep't, 241 Ga. App. 659, 527 S.E.2d 270 (1999).

Trial court incorrectly held that counterclaim alleging violations of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., were based on the prayer for relief contained in the original complaint filed by a housing authority, and since the housing authority failed to show that the factual issues regarding the counterclaim must have been decided in the authority's favor, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the housing authority on this claim. Strange v. Hous. Auth. of Summerville, 268 Ga. App. 403, 602 S.E.2d 185 (2004).

- Trial court did not abuse the court's discretion in denying an individual's petition for mandamus, attorney's fees, and expenses under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., as the individual sued without following-up with the city on the records request; the individual failed to show that the city acted without substantial justification in not complying with the Act as required by O.C.G.A. § 50-18-73(b). Everett v. Rast, 272 Ga. App. 636, 612 S.E.2d 925 (2005).

- County's summary judgment motion was properly denied as: (1) the county violated the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., by failing to respond to a bidder's request within three business days; (2) the county did not produce any documents for over a month and did not provide all requested documents until after a civil suit for attorney's fees was filed; and (3) the county further failed to explain the county's dilatory conduct in any evidence submitted with the county's summary judgment motion. Benefit Support, Inc. v. Hall County, 281 Ga. App. 825, 637 S.E.2d 763 (2006), cert. denied, No. S07C0306, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 214 (Ga. 2007).

Cited in Rentz v. City of Moultrie, 231 Ga. 579, 203 S.E.2d 216 (1974); Morton v. Skrine, 242 Ga. 844, 252 S.E.2d 408 (1979); Doe v. Sears, 245 Ga. 83, 263 S.E.2d 119 (1980); Bennett v. State, 158 Ga. App. 421, 280 S.E.2d 429 (1981); Price v. Fulton County Comm'n, 170 Ga. App. 736, 318 S.E.2d 153 (1984); City of Atlanta v. Pacific & S. Co., 257 Ga. 587, 361 S.E.2d 484 (1987); Conklin v. Zant, 263 Ga. 165, 430 S.E.2d 589 (1993); Ford v. City of Oakwood, 905 F. Supp. 1063 (N.D. Ga. 1995); Bogle v. McClure, 332 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2003); Peacock v. Spivey, 278 Ga. App. 338, 629 S.E.2d 48 (2006); Fulton DeKalb Hosp. Auth. v. Miller & Billips, 293 Ga. App. 601, 667 S.E.2d 455 (2008); Martin v. Ledbetter, 342 Ga. App. 208, 802 S.E.2d 432 (2017); Campaign for Accountability v. Consumer Credit Research Found., 303 Ga. 828, 815 S.E.2d 841 (2018); Gay v. State, 351 Ga. App. 811, 833 S.E.2d 305 (2019), cert. denied, No. S20C0264, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 317 (Ga. 2020).

Public Records

"Public records" defined.

- Documents, papers, and records prepared and maintained in the course of the operation of a public office are "public records" within the meaning of this section, and it is immaterial that such documents, papers, and records were not required to be prepared and maintained pursuant to a statute or ordinance. Houston v. Rutledge, 237 Ga. 764, 229 S.E.2d 624 (1976); Irvin v. Macon Tel. Publishing Co., 253 Ga. 43, 316 S.E.2d 449 (1984).

The 1980 amendment of the definition of "public records" in O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(b) does not indicate a legislative intent to modify the definition of "public records" set forth in Houston v. Ruthledge, 237 Ga. 764, 229 S.E.2d 624 (1976). Irvin v. Macon Tel. Publishing Co., 253 Ga. 43, 316 S.E.2d 449 (1984).

Tax records that the individual submitted to the city in the individual's successful attempt to get certified as a disadvantaged business eligible to be awarded city contracts pursuant to that designation were "public records" because the records were received by the city in the course of the city's operations and were used by the city to determine whether the individual qualified for the program; also, since the individual could not show an exception existed to the corporation's request for disclosure of those records for the limited purpose of evaluating whether the city properly designated the individual as a disadvantaged business, the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the corporation on the corporation's disclosure request. City of Atlanta v. Corey Entm't, Inc., 278 Ga. 474, 604 S.E.2d 140 (2004).

- Under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(f), the three-day time period to respond to a records request commences upon delivery of the request to the agency, rather than the particular employee in charge of the records. Unified Gov't v. Athens Newspapers, LLC, 284 Ga. 192, 663 S.E.2d 248 (2008).

Communications to county officials from attorney are county records and, therefore, are not privileged communications between an attorney and client. Crow v. Brown, 332 F. Supp. 382 (N.D. Ga. 1971), aff'd, 457 F.2d 788 (5th Cir. 1972).

- Report representing the final analysis and recommendations after a study by paid consultants to a state university, evaluating the mathematical departments, is a public record. Athens Observer, Inc. v. Anderson, 245 Ga. 63, 263 S.E.2d 128 (1980).

- Applications submitted by candidates for the position of Georgia State University president, and the resumes and vitae, which were products of the applicants themselves, although the resumes and vitae were materials upon which, in part, "confidential evaluations" were based, were not evaluations. Hence the resumes and vitae were not exempt from disclosure. Board of Regents v. Atlanta Journal, 259 Ga. 214, 378 S.E.2d 305 (1989).

- Because the president of the University of Georgia is charged with controlling the intercollegiate sports program at the university and because the maintenance of documents relating to the assets, liabilities, income, and expenses of the intercollegiate sports program is an integral part thereof, regardless of whether the documents are prepared by employees of a private Athletic Association or by the president as treasurer of that association, it is clear that they are documents, papers, and records prepared and maintained in the course of the operation of a public office, and are therefore "public records" under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Macon Tel. Publishing Co. v. Board of Regents, 256 Ga. 443, 350 S.E.2d 23 (1986).

- With respect to information pertaining to athletics at the University of Georgia, the following are public records: initial reports, prepared by coaches, of outside income; contracts between coaches and suppliers of equipment and apparel for athletes; and information related to radio and television broadcasts, whether produced by the university or as part of the university's exclusive rights to broadcast football and basketball games. However, contracts between individual coaches and outside entities to make speaking appearances or to provide commentary during certain basketball broadcasts were not public records since there was no evidence that the documents related to athletic events involving the university. Dooley v. Davidson, 260 Ga. 577, 397 S.E.2d 922 (1990).

- Records relating to bids to build a racing hall of fame and to host a football game were subject to the Open Records Act (Act), O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., because public officials participated in the preparation and promotion of the bids, the bids required spending public funds or use of public resources, and the bid documents were "received" within the meaning of the Act. Cent. Atlanta Progress, Inc. v. Baker, 278 Ga. App. 733, 629 S.E.2d 840 (2006).

Student organization court records of the University of Georgia concerning alleged university rules and regulations violations on the part of fraternities and sororities were "public records" subject to the "Open Records Act", O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., and not exempted by O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a) by virtue of any federal legislation. Red & Black Publishing Co. v. Board of Regents, 262 Ga. 848, 427 S.E.2d 257 (1993).

Consultant appearance contract of a university athletic coach relates to a private activity, is not a public record, and need not be disclosed. Cremins v. Atlanta Journal, 261 Ga. 496, 405 S.E.2d 675 (1991).

- Records of a campus police force of a private university were not subject to disclosure under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., as the university was a private institution that did not receive any funding from the state, the campus police were employees of that entity pursuant to the authority of O.C.G.A. § 20-8-2, and the fact that the police performed a public function did not make their records into public records; the fact that the campus police were given authority to perform certain functions by the Campus Policemen Act, O.C.G.A. § 20-8-1 et seq., and the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Act, O.C.G.A. § 35-8-1 et seq., did not make the campus police officers or employees of a public office or agency for purposes of the Open Records Act. The Corp. of Mercer Univ. v. Barrett & Farahany, L.L.P., 271 Ga. App. 501, 610 S.E.2d 138 (2005).

Personnel records of school bus drivers in the possession of a private company transporting pupils under a contract with a city school system were "public records" subject to the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Hackworth v. Board of Educ., 214 Ga. App. 17, 447 S.E.2d 78 (1994).

- Despite private status of corporations created as part of a reorganization of county hospital authority, when assets of the authority were transferred to one or more of the corporations, and the records of all of the corporations remained in the possession and control of the authority, the private corporations were subject to the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., and the requested documents were "public records" under that Act. Clayton County Hosp. Auth. v. Webb, 208 Ga. App. 91, 430 S.E.2d 89 (1993).

Real property ad valorem digests, returns, and related records, not having been made confidential by law, are subject to inspection under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70. Pensyl v. Peach County, 252 Ga. 450, 314 S.E.2d 434 (1984).

Records of criminal investigations fall within the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 if the criminal investigation has been completed. Cox Enters., Inc. v. Harris, 256 Ga. 299, 348 S.E.2d 448 (1986).

- Investigatory report concerning claims of misconduct against an employee of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles was a public record and was not exempt from disclosure under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72. Fincher v. State, 231 Ga. App. 49, 497 S.E.2d 632 (1998).

Records of Georgia Bureau of Investigation's investigation of Department of Agriculture employees and administrative law judge's order reviewing that investigation were public records subject to disclosure. Irvin v. Macon Tel. Publishing Co., 253 Ga. 43, 316 S.E.2d 449 (1984).

- When a murder conviction and death sentence resulting from the prosecution have been affirmed on appeal, but a rape conviction has been reversed on a ground that leaves the state free to retry the defendant, the possible retrial of the defendant does not warrant nondisclosure the defendant of criminal investigatory files, when the agency custodians of the files at issue failed to carry the custodian's burden of showing an imminent proceeding on the rape charge against the defendant to exempt such files from disclosure pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(4). Parker v. Lee, 259 Ga. 195, 378 S.E.2d 677 (1989).

- Although motor vehicle records used by police during the "Atlanta child murders" case were not open for public inspection under the Public Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., this did not preclude public disclosure when a law-enforcement officer who had inspected the records incorporated information therefrom into an investigatory case file. Napper v. Georgia Television Co., 257 Ga. 156, 356 S.E.2d 640 (1987).

- Neither the "state matter" privilege nor the "secret of state" privilege exempted cost estimates of the DOT from disclosure under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Hardaway Co. v. Rives, 262 Ga. 631, 422 S.E.2d 854 (1992).

Disclosure by bank that customer was involved with some motor vehicles financed through the bank was not an invasion of privacy based on public disclosure of private facts as, at the time of the disclosure, motor vehicle certificates of title were public records open to public inspection. Williams v. Coffee County Bank, 168 Ga. App. 149, 308 S.E.2d 430 (1983).

- Reports generated as part of the state's hospital licensing activities rather than as peer review records are not protected from disclosure under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., or by O.C.G.A. § 31-7-15(d). Georgia Hosp. Ass'n v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 477, 396 S.E.2d 488 (1990).

- Hospital accreditation records generated by a nonprofit organization are not protected from disclosure as the records of a confidential review organization under O.C.G.A. § 31-7-133 because the organization is not a "review organization" comprised primarily of "professional health care providers" as those terms are defined by O.C.G.A. § 31-7-131. Georgia Hosp. Ass'n v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 477, 396 S.E.2d 488 (1990).

Because hospital accreditation surveys do not fit into any of the categories of records exempted from disclosure, the policy underlying the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., mandates the survey's release. The public has a legitimate interest in the records which make up the Department of Human Resources' hospital licensing decisions. Georgia Hosp. Ass'n v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 477, 396 S.E.2d 488 (1990).

- Records kept by the administrator of the State Health Benefit Plan were public records under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(a). Although the administrator was a private entity, its administration of the Plan involved the expenditure of substantial public funds, and public officials were significantly involved in it; the administrator was the vehicle through which the Georgia Department of Community Health carried out its public function of administering the Plan; and the records were maintained, at least in part, in order for the administrator to comply with its contractual obligations in administering the Plan. United HealthCare of Ga., Inc. v. Ga. Dep't of Cmty. Health, 293 Ga. App. 84, 666 S.E.2d 472 (2008).

- Public records prepared and maintained in a concluded investigation of alleged or actual criminal activity should be available for public inspection. Houston v. Rutledge, 237 Ga. 764, 229 S.E.2d 624 (1976).

Trial court properly granted summary judgment to the corporation on the corporation's request for disclosure of the individual's tax records, which the corporation sought for the limited purpose of determining whether the individual's business properly qualified as a disadvantaged business regarding the awarding to it of a city contract for airport advertising, as Georgia's Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., favored the disclosure of public records and neither the individual nor the city could find a specific exception that applied to bar disclosure under such circumstances. City of Atlanta v. Corey Entm't, Inc., 278 Ga. 474, 604 S.E.2d 140 (2004).

- Although a criminal defendant may have access to government records as a member of the public, the access is not based on that person's status as a criminal defendant. Accordingly, there was no basis for making a governmental unit's compliance with the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, a prerequisite to the success of the state's prosecution of this defendant for speeding. Stone v. State, 257 Ga. App. 492, 571 S.E.2d 488 (2002).

Police reports concerning rape were public records obtainable by a student newspaper; the reports were not exempt under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72 since the reports were not the subject of a pending investigation and involved a matter which had been terminated. Doe v. Board of Regents, 215 Ga. App. 684, 452 S.E.2d 776 (1994).

Under a strict construction of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., and because no active or ongoing investigation in a 1992 rape and murder case was shown, the trial court erred in granting a county summary judgment in support of the county's refusal to provide the newspaper access to the relevant police records in that case as no legitimate and valid reason was presented denying that the newspaper was entitled to disclosure of the records the county maintained; moreover, there were no suspects or evidence that would likely lead to identifying a suspect, and there was only a slight possibility that the county's submission of the DNA to a database would ever result in progress in solving the case. Athens Newspapers, LLC v. Unified Gov't, 284 Ga. App. 465, 643 S.E.2d 774 (2007), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 284 Ga. 192, 663 S.E.2d 248 (2008).

- Campus newspaper was entitled to university police reports concerning an incident of alleged rape but, in accordance with the rape victim confidentiality statute, O.C.G.A. § 16-6-23, with the victim's name and identifying information redacted. Doe v. Board of Regents, 215 Ga. App. 684, 452 S.E.2d 776 (1994).

- Confidential tax information in an investigative file of the Attorney General was not subject to disclosure under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70. Bowers v. Shelton, 265 Ga. 247, 453 S.E.2d 741 (1995).

- If the requesting party signs a statement agreeing not to use the requested information for commercial purposes, there is no basis under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 to deny access to the records. Clayton County Hosp. Auth. v. Webb, 208 Ga. App. 91, 430 S.E.2d 89 (1993).

- When a coroner, who is a public official, makes an inquest and opens the inquest to the public, and the testimony given at the public inquest is recorded and transcribed at public expense, the coroner has waived any right to contend that the transcript is not a public record. R.W. Page Corp. v. Kilgore, 257 Ga. 179, 356 S.E.2d 870 (1987).

- Because the superior court had not ordered that its seal be lifted under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-500(a), a CD-ROM containing election information was by law prohibited or specifically exempted from being open to inspection by the general public and thus was not an open record subject to disclosure under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(b). Smith v. DeKalb County, 288 Ga. App. 574, 654 S.E.2d 469 (2007), cert. denied, No. S08C0596, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 291 (Ga. 2008).

- Because relators obtained the realtors' information under the Freedom of Information Act and Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq., requests, the responses to the requests were "reports" under the False Claims Act's public disclosure bar in 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4)(A) (amended), and thus publicly disclosed, so dismissal of the realtors' qui tam suit, alleging the defendants, employees of a federal agency and a university and the university's research foundation, provided false information to obtain research funds, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was proper. United States v. Walker, F.3d (11th Cir. Aug. 26, 2011)(Unpublished).

- Trial court did not err in granting the Georgia Department of Agriculture summary judgment in a corporation's action seeking to compel the Department to comply with the corporation's request for records under the Georgia Open Records Act (GORA), O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., because the Department provided the corporation with reasonable access to the information the corporation sought; because the information the corporation sought, e-mail correspondence, was not an existing public record, non-disclosure thereof did not violate GORA, and the Department did not maintain the e-mails on the Department's system and would have to extract the e-mails from backup tapes using a laborious compilation process. Griffin Indus. v. Ga. Dep't of Agric., 313 Ga. App. 69, 720 S.E.2d 212 (2011).

Balancing of Interests

Judicial determination of necessity for inspection.

- When a controversy arises between a citizen and a public official, the judiciary has the rather important duty of determining whether inspection or noninspection of the public records is in the public interest; the judiciary must balance the interest of the public in favor of inspection against the interest of the public in favor of noninspection in deciding this issue. Athens Observer, Inc. v. Anderson, 245 Ga. 63, 263 S.E.2d 128 (1980); Atchison v. Hospital Auth., 245 Ga. 494, 265 S.E.2d 801 (1980).

- In determining whether allowing members of the public to inspect records would be in the public interest, the trial court must weigh factors militating in favor of inspection (i.e., the interest of the citizens in knowing what their government officials are doing) against factors militating against inspection (i.e., whether this would unduly disrupt the state activity involved). In this regard, the court must weigh benefits accruing to the government from nondisclosure against the harm which may result to the public if such records are not made available for inspection. Northside Realty Assocs. v. Community Relations Comm'n, 240 Ga. 432, 241 S.E.2d 189 (1978).

- There is nothing in the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., which imposes a duty on the trial court to make a supervisory review of records disclosed under that Act. Trammel v. Martin, 200 Ga. App. 435, 408 S.E.2d 477 (1991).

- Judiciary must balance the interest of the public in favor of inspection against the interest of the public in favor of noninspection in deciding whether inspection or noninspection of the public records is in the public interest. Northside Realty Assocs. v. Community Relations Comm'n, 240 Ga. 432, 241 S.E.2d 189 (1978).

- When it was found that the plaintiff (citizen) had made a request for identifiable public records within the defendant's (police department's) possession, the burden was cast on the defendant to explain why the records should not be furnished. Brown v. Minter, 243 Ga. 397, 254 S.E.2d 326, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 844, 100 S. Ct. 88, 62 L. Ed. 2d 57 (1979).

- Under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, a citizen seeking an opportunity to copy and inspect a public record need not show any special or personal interest therein. Northside Realty Assocs. v. Community Relations Comm'n, 240 Ga. 432, 241 S.E.2d 189 (1978).

Courts are not authorized to deny members of the public requests to inspect documents merely because those making requests have no special or personal interest in the documents. Northside Realty Assocs. v. Community Relations Comm'n, 240 Ga. 432, 241 S.E.2d 189 (1978).

- Disclosure of the names, salaries, and job titles of county hospital employees is not an invasion of personal privacy as contemplated by the General Assembly to permit an exemption from disclosure, nor is the public interest in disclosure outweighed by benefits to the hospital accruing from nondisclosure. Richmond County Hosp. Auth. v. Southeastern Newspapers Corp., 252 Ga. 19, 311 S.E.2d 806 (1984).

- Neither this section nor any other provision of the law disqualifies a citizen of this state from exercising rights under that section because the citizen happens to be an employee of a nonresident corporation and may share the information received with the citizen's employer. Atchison v. Hospital Auth., 245 Ga. 494, 265 S.E.2d 801 (1980).

- Trial court erred in entering summary judgment for a county and a county manager in an employee's suit for attorney fees arising out of a Georgia Open Records Act (ORA), O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., request as the employee showed that the ORA was violated as the manager did not respond to the request within the required three-day period; the case was remanded for a determination of whether the ORA violation was without substantial justification or whether special circumstances existed that counseled against awarding attorney fees. Wallace v. Greene County, 274 Ga. App. 776, 618 S.E.2d 642 (2005).

Exceptions

Exceptions generally.

- Exceptions permitted under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 include disclosure of information regarding on-going investigations, the names of informants, and in exceptional and necessarily limited cases, the names of complainants. Brown v. Minter, 243 Ga. 397, 254 S.E.2d 326, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 844, 100 S. Ct. 88, 62 L. Ed. 2d 57 (1979).

- County's sheriff and district attorney were not required to release records relating to an inmate's death in custody under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1, et seq., because the records came within the "pending prosecution" exemption to disclosure in O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(4). The exception for agencies under investigation did not apply because "agency," as defined in O.C.G.A. §§ 50-14-1(a)(1)(C) and50-18-70(b), was not synonymous with "employee," and the agency itself was not under investigation. Media Gen. Operations, Inc. v. St. Lawrence, 337 Ga. App. 428, 787 S.E.2d 778 (2016).

- Trial court properly held that a CD-ROM that contained passwords, encryption codes, and other security information would compromise election security and thus was exempt from disclosure under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(15)(A)(iv). Although the requestor argued that the state could copy the CD-ROM without including such information, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(d) provided that an agency was not required to create records that were not in existence at the time of the request. Smith v. DeKalb County, 288 Ga. App. 574, 654 S.E.2d 469 (2007), cert. denied, No. S08C0596, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 291 (Ga. 2008).

- Public records that are prepared and maintained in a current and continuing investigation of possible criminal activity should not be open for public inspection. Houston v. Rutledge, 237 Ga. 764, 229 S.E.2d 624 (1976).

- Mere placement of records of Georgia Bureau of Investigation's investigation in the personnel file of an investigated public employee did not transform the records into personnel-related records. Irvin v. Macon Tel. Publishing Co., 253 Ga. 43, 316 S.E.2d 449 (1984).

- Former employee failed to show a violation of the employee's right to privacy by a city manager's release of the employee's personnel records because personnel records of municipal employees were not entitled to any blanket exemption from the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70. Goddard v. City of Albany, 285 Ga. 882, 684 S.E.2d 635 (2009).

- Disclosure provisions of O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70(b) do not apply to clinical records as defined by O.C.G.A. § 37-3-1(2). Southeastern Legal Found., Inc. v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 803, 400 S.E.2d 630 (1991).

Mental health records of a person who allegedly shot a number of people in a shopping mall were "clinical records" within the meaning of O.C.G.A. § 37-3-1(2), and therefore not subject to inspection under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. Southeastern Legal Found., Inc. v. Ledbetter, 260 Ga. 803, 400 S.E.2d 630 (1991).

Medical review committee findings provided for in O.C.G.A. § 31-7-143, in the control of any government agency, is not subject to inspection or release under the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 and any such material should be redacted from any reports which the agency is otherwise required to make available for inspection or release to the public. Emory Univ. Hosp. v. Sweeney, 220 Ga. App. 502, 469 S.E.2d 772 (1996).

- When a company made reasonable efforts to restrict the dissemination of trade secret information except for providing the information to the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, trade secret status was not lost simply because the company did not notify the EPD each time that the company provided EPD with information containing trade secrets. Theragenics Corp. v. Department of Natural Resources, 244 Ga. App. 829, 536 S.E.2d 613 (2000), aff'd, Ga. Dep't of Natural Res. v. Theragenics Corp., 273 Ga. 724, 545 S.E.2d 904 (2001).

Given the highly competitive nature of the asphalt industry in the State of Georgia, the trial court did not err in permanently enjoining the DOT from giving unredacted copies of documents, which contained trade secrets and confidential technical specifications relating to the mix design, to a competitor of a group of contractors; further, the public could ascertain whether a contractor's asphalt product met DOT requirements by examining information on the forms, which was not included in the trial court's injunction, and the records did not fall within the exception to Open Records Act disclosure because the contractors were not required by law to submit the information to the DOT. Douglas Asphalt Co. v. E. R. Snell Contr., Inc., 282 Ga. App. 546, 639 S.E.2d 372 (2006), cert. denied, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 140 (2007).

- Supreme Court of Georgia interpreted O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(a)(47) to provide that Quick Start records disclosing an economic development project are excepted only to the extent that no binding commitment has been secured, but the exception for Quick Start records relating to job applicants or identifying proprietary hiring practices, training, skills, or other business methods and practices of a private entity is not so limited. Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170, 751 S.E.2d 337 (2013).

- Trial court properly granted summary judgment to the corporation as the individual did not show that an exception applied to the corporation's request that the individual disclose the individual's tax records to the corporation for the limited purpose of determining whether the city properly awarded the individual a city contract following the individual's certification as a disadvantaged business pursuant to a federal program. City of Atlanta v. Corey Entm't, Inc., 278 Ga. 474, 604 S.E.2d 140 (2004).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

"Public record" defined.

- Public record is one made by a public officer in pursuance of a duty, the immediate purpose of which is to disseminate information to the public or to serve as a memorial of official transactions for public reference. 1971 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U71-9.

- Mere fact that a document is deposited or filed in a public office, or with a public officer, or is in the custody of a public officer, does not make the document a public record; the crucial aspect which makes applications and related materials subject to public scrutiny is the necessity for a board to keep these documents in the discharge of a board's proper duty. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 76-126.

Georgia courts have adopted a balancing test in construing O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U81-47.

Use of term "law" in O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 likely encompasses agency rules and regulations. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 81-50.

- Citizen requesting to inspect and copy public records subject to the Open Records Act cannot be required to first obtain a subpoena. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-105.

- Information does not fall outside the scope of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., because the information is stored by means of magnetic tape or diskette rather than in a more traditional form. When the requested information can be retrieved by a minimal computer search, an agency must comply. The parameters of the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., cannot be altered by contract and any such provisions are unenforceable. 1989 Op. Att'y Gen. 89-32.

- Under former Code 1933, § 89-601 (see O.C.G.A. § 45-6-6), grand jury lists are public records and as such are matters which are open to inspection by citizens at a reasonable time and place; any citizen, even a newspaper publisher, may copy grand jury lists and also publish the lists in a newspaper, if the citizen so desires. 1967 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 67-371.

Suits on account, notes, mortgage foreclosures, and garnishments were "public records" since they were required by law to be kept, as well as within former Code 1933, § 89-601 (see O.C.G.A. § 45-6-6), since they were contained in books kept by a public officer under the laws of Georgia. Therefore, as public records these matters should be open to inspection by citizens at a reasonable time and place. 1967 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 67-340.

- Documents pertaining to inspection of Section 8 housing are subject to open records requests. 1991 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 91-33.

- Police officer's investigative report prepared for submission to the officer's superiors is not a record which must be available for inspection or copying. 1975 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U75-92.

- This section does not require personnel records of a local board of education to be made available to the general public for inspection or copying, and should the board so desire, local school boards may lawfully maintain a policy of confidentiality concerning such files. 1977 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 77-56.

Personnel records of employees of university system are state records within meaning of this section. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-88.

- As for those employees who might not desire to have salary information disclosed, in accepting employment by the state, the employees necessarily accepted the conditions imposed by law upon that employment. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-88.

- Trade secrets and other confidential business information received by the state energy office from the federal government and businesses in the private sector are not within the purview of this section, and may be treated as confidential by that state agency. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U74-113.

- Open Records Law provides for inspection and copying of public records by citizens, but does not require the Department of Education to itself prepare and furnish copies of public records to interested persons. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U76-43.

- This section is generally interpreted to intend that records kept on behalf of the public shall be open and that those kept for the benefit of an individual shall not. Common sense and good judgment should prevail, but there is no absolute legal right on the part of a parent to inspect a minor child's school records. 1972 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U72-74.

- Records should be made available for inspection upon request by any nonresident of Georgia unless disclosure is prohibited by court order or otherwise exempted by law. 1993 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 93-27.

- Records in the office of the justice of the peace are public records of a court and are open for inspection by the general public, including a notary public, ex officio justice of the peace. 1962 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 101.

- Licensure applications submitted to the State Board of Registration of Used Car Dealers and their necessary parts are public records and, therefore, applications and related material become state records open to public scrutiny when the records are received by the board; financial statements submitted are a necessary part of this application and are, therefore, open for public inspection, and it would not be permissible for the board to return the financial statements to the applicant without subjecting the applicant to public scrutiny. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 76-126.

Licensure of nursing home programs is subject to the Open Records Law. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 65-93.

- Records may be made available for inspection by members of the public who might come in and make a request, but no such information is to be given by telephone. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-88.

- Names, addresses, and zip codes of electors must be furnished upon request for the fees set forth in O.C.G.A. § 21-2-234. Any additional identifying information as may be collected and maintained must also be made available for inspection and copying and a reasonable fee may be charged for expenses incurred for copies furnished. 1984 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 84-39.

- O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 does not mandate that inmate records are to be open for public inspection since Department of Offender Rehabilitation (now Department of Corrections) rules and regulations, which have the force and effect of law, require that inmate records not be open for public inspection. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 81-50.

Department of Offender Rehabilitation (now Department of Corrections) may properly release to Social Security Administration (SSA) inmate records necessary to enable SSA to perform SSA's statutory duties; so long as information released is necessary for SSA to carry out SSA's statutorily prescribed duties, the department will not be liable for invasion of an inmate's privacy. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 81-50.

- Department of Medical Assistance (now Department of Community Health) must disclose maximum payments available to providers under the various reimbursement schedules. 1980 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 80-50.

- Information obtained pursuant to criminal history background check under O.C.G.A. § 16-11-129 is confidential. Information obtained pursuant to criminal history background check, required by O.C.G.A. § 16-11-129, from taking of fingerprints and checking of these fingerprints with those presently on file with the Georgia Crime Information Center is of a confidential nature and prohibited from public disclosure. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U81-47.

- Only names of persons issued permits to carry revolvers and date of issuance are matters of public record. 1981 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U81-47.

Utility accounts of a municipality are not exempt from disclosure under the Open Records Law, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. 1982 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U82-36.

- Billing and payment records of public employees and officials to a municipally owned and operated public utility system are subject to disclosure, barring the proper application of any exception. 2000 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2000-4.

- Invoices reflecting sales of alcohol beverages by wholesalers to local retailers furnished to a local governing authority for the purpose of computing local alcohol excise tax are public records under O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 and should be disclosed. 1985 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U85-44.

- Copying of copyrighted manuals, rates, and rules which must be filed with the insurance commissioner would not constitute an unfair use and hence would not amount to an infringement but, to the contrary, would constitute a fair use within the purpose for which the filing was made with the commissioner. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-178.

Notices of plant closings received from private employers by the Georgia Department of Labor pursuant to the "Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act" are subject to public disclosure under the Georgia Open Records Law, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. 1989 Op. Att'y Gen. 89-38.

- It is not proper for county tax commissioner to store tax records in the commissioner's home. 1975 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U75-75.

Members of the General Assembly have no greater right than any other citizen to inspect records deemed confidential under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. 1988 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U88-33.

- Decisions of the Office of State Administrative Hearings are public records subject to distribution unless the decisions contain information subject to a confidentiality provision. 1999 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 99-13.

- All records of the State Board of Workers' Compensation pertaining to accidents, injuries, and settlements are confidential, unless a party can meet the statutory requirements for access or has authority pursuant to the Child Support Recovery Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-1 et seq. 1991 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 91-5.

Records of the State Board of Workers' Compensation Fraud and Compliance Division are subject to disclosure under the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., except when such disclosure is exempted by the Act, prohibited by law, or prohibited by court order. 1997 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 97-20.

- Documents used in the competitive bidding process under the federal Job Training Partnership Act of 1982 are subject to the Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq. 1991 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 91-11.

Salary and expense information of nonprofit contractors receiving "arts grants" funds through the Office of Planning and Budget based upon the recommendation of the Georgia Council for the Arts must be made available for public inspection. 1995 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 95-31.

- Agencies covered by the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq., may not by contract with a federal agency create an exception to the Act and make otherwise public documents in the hands of the agency confidential unless the contract provision is mandated by federal law or regulation. 2005 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U2005-1.

- Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (42 U.S.C. § 1320d) does not prevent the release of information on copies of death certificates about the cause of death of an individual, as well as conditions leading to the person's death and information regarding surgical proceedings conducted on the deceased, if any, that are released under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq. 2007 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2007-4.

- The Department of Revenue is authorized to provide access to the information contained in the Georgia Registration and Title Information System only for the purposes mandated by the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2721 - 2725, or to those state agencies designated in O.C.G.A. §§ 33-34-9,40-2-130(c), and40-3-23(d). 2008 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2008-2.

- Georgia Superior Court Clerks' Cooperative Authority is required to produce images and index data in response to Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70 et seq., requests for information contained on the online information system for deeds, liens, and plats, but may do so in accordance with a fee schedule adopted pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 15-6-94. 2012 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 12-5.

12B Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Freedom of Information Act, § 46.

- 66 Am. Jur. 2d, Records and Recording Laws, §§ 17, 22, 26 et seq.

Litigation Under the Freedom of Information Act, 50 Am. Jur. Trials 407.

- 76 C.J.S., Records, § 43 et seq.

- Right to examine records or documents of municipality relating to public utility conducted by it, 102 A.L.R. 756.

Enforceability by mandamus of right to inspect public records, 169 A.L.R. 653.

Validity, construction, and application of statutory provisions relating to public access to police records, 82 A.L.R.3d 19.

Restricting access to records of disciplinary proceedings against attorneys, 83 A.L.R.3d 749.

Discovery or inspection of state bar records of complaints against or investigations of attorneys, 83 A.L.R.3d 777.

Restricting access to judicial records of concluded adoption proceedings, 83 A.L.R.3d 800.

Accused's right to discovery or inspection of "rap sheets" or similar police records about prosecution witnesses, 95 A.L.R.3d 832.

What constitutes preliminary drafts or notes provided by or for state or local governmental agency, or intra-agency memorandums, exempt from disclosure or inspection under state freedom of information acts, 26 A.L.R.4th 639.

Patient's right to disclosure of his or her own medical records under state freedom of information act, 26 A.L.R.4th 701.

What are "records" of agency which must be made available under state freedom of information act, 27 A.L.R.4th 680.

What constitutes an agency subject to application of state freedom of information act, 27 A.L.R.4th 742.

What constitutes "trade secrets" exempt from disclosure under state freedom of information act, 27 A.L.R.4th 773.

State freedom of information act requests: right to receive information in particular medium or format, 86 A.L.R.4th 786.

Propriety of publishing identity of sexual assault victim, 40 A.L.R.5th 787.

Actions brought under Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 522 et seq. - Supreme Court cases, 167 A.L.R. Fed. 545.

What constitutes "agency" for purposes of Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.A § 552), 165 A.L.R. Fed. 591.

Disclosure of electronic data under state public records and freedom of information acts, 54 A.L.R.6th 653.

What are "records" of agency which must be made available under Freedom of Information Act (5 USCA § 552(a)(3)), 153 A.L.R. Fed. 571.

Disclosure, under State Freedom of Information or Records Act, of video obtained by police or other law enforcement authorities from dash camera, mobile video recorder, or security or surveillance camera, 48 A.L.R.7th Art. 2.