Utah Supreme Court
Can Utah courts order disclosure of protected disciplinary records under GRAMA? Young v. Salt Lake County Explained
Summary
Former deputy sheriff Brent Young sought disciplinary records of other deputies investigated for similar conduct to support his termination appeal. The district court granted summary judgment ordering disclosure of the records. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the court’s authority to order disclosure under GRAMA but reversed to the extent the order would require disclosure of unappealed charges protected by statute.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
In Young v. Salt Lake County, the Utah Supreme Court clarified the scope of judicial authority under the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) when ordering disclosure of governmental records, particularly disciplinary records protected by specific statutes.
Background and Facts
Brent Young, a former Salt Lake County Sheriff’s deputy, was terminated for alleged firearm misuse and sexual misconduct. While preparing for his termination appeal, Young requested disciplinary records of other deputies investigated for similar conduct. The County denied his request, and Young appealed through the proper GRAMA channels before seeking judicial review in district court.
Key Legal Issues
The court addressed two primary issues: (1) whether Young’s petition for judicial review was timely filed under GRAMA’s statutory framework, and (2) whether the district court had authority to order disclosure of the requested records despite section 17-30-19, which protects unappealed disciplinary charges from public disclosure.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Supreme Court affirmed that Young’s petition was timely under section 63-2-404(2)(b)(i), which allows thirty days from a governmental entity’s response to file for judicial review. The court found that district courts have broad authority under section 63-2-404 to order disclosure of governmental records after weighing competing interests. However, the court reversed to the extent the order would require disclosure of unappealed charges protected by section 17-30-19, finding that the legislature’s explicit policy determination against disclosure of such records could not be overcome through GRAMA’s balancing test.
Practice Implications
This decision demonstrates that while GRAMA provides significant authority for courts to order disclosure of governmental records, specific statutory protections remain paramount. Practitioners should carefully analyze whether other statutes protect particular categories of records before assuming GRAMA’s disclosure provisions will prevail. The decision also clarifies GRAMA’s timing requirements for judicial review petitions.
Case Details
Case Name
Young v. Salt Lake County
Citation
2002 UT 70
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
Nos. 20010101, 20010294
Date Decided
July 23, 2002
Outcome
Affirmed in part and Reversed in part
Holding
A district court has authority under GRAMA section 63-2-404 to order disclosure of governmental records but cannot order disclosure of unappealed disciplinary charges protected by section 17-30-19.
Standard of Review
Correctness for summary judgment
Practice Tip
When seeking GRAMA records in judicial review, consider whether specific statutory provisions like section 17-30-19 may protect certain categories of disciplinary records from disclosure.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.