20-ORD-132 | KOGC

Opinion

Opinion By: Daniel Cameron,Attorney General;Marc Manley,Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Decision

On June 3, 2020, Clester Mullins ("Appellant"), an inmate at the Complex, requested that the Complex provide a copy of a JPay email he received from a private party. In a timely response, the Complex denied the request. This appeal followed.

Since the initiation of this appeal, this Office issued a decision finding that JPay emails exchanged between inmates and private parties generally are not "public records" within the meaning of KRS 61.870(2). See 20-ORD-109 (copy enclosed). The JPay emails Appellant has requested were neither sent to nor received by the Complex or any other public agency. There is also no evidence in the record that suggests the Complex has used these emails for any administrative purpose to bring them within the statutory definition of a "public record." KRS 61.870(2). Accordingly, the JPay emails Appellant has requested are not public records and the Complex did not violate the Act by denying the request.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General shall be notified of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings.

LLM Summary

The decision concludes that JPay emails requested by an inmate, which were exchanged between the inmate and a private party, do not qualify as 'public records' under KRS 61.870(2). The decision follows the precedent set in 20-ORD-109, which found that such emails generally do not meet the definition of public records unless used by a public agency for administrative purposes. Therefore, the denial of the request by the Complex was upheld.

Support Our Work