WPCl #hytXb d?)I">ë;c246MJ$,w 0 #I)cP>|1יSYab \s!Gu9QuhSݱw1BeƳZ%աygeŨ[UJ=Wx@5TB:ea2@E_(2Yk 7"DzP?{|>3}*<@ߓ~FZdqZ>ڏxVFξږu۟\O D_|+c5Jz?~|Oto8h_[ܦh㫳oLrg>w%ڙxJZC%} pvŽZl :bӚv̓S:ǽniH3ٞsFH@ ?j\ x;.kx2tplʀş^e+b %\U @b 0N*UN, 1z 72 z3  0c 0 0l U :3 m 3   0wN 0 0ER 0T 0/ 0D 1ub 72 1  72U!N^  0Dw`4dx m#baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 0iiii BTT 0q D3 D-H 0Kuu AS 0 0D} A(9 Z(Times New Roman (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular   hCEIMQUY]aAutoList1""""""""i)1)a)" C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#,cAZ"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(# 3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)   hCEIMQUY]aAutoList2""""""""i)1)a)"(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regularі}+s (#$  0  ^p+ k2h3|xUHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0- -(|G2U*$ !.8Y|d XXd8         0  , d(|3]$ !.8Y|d XXd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3]$ !.8Y|d XXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Md d8     _  78; XXdd 8  @ ?"7INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%AT#7?" #JACKSON &   September18,2001Session L XvoX7 #7XXvo#HAROLDLEEJACKSONv.JIMROUT,MayorofShelbyCounty,etal.XvoX7  J @@ ADirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforShelbyCounty  J @@No.CH0007763TheHonorableD.J._Alissandratos_,Chancellor  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200002974_COA_ԄR3CVFiledNovember26,2001   AV) ` dE<|` A }     XvoXXXvo  Citizenfiledapetitionagainstcountymayor,countysheriff,andcountycommissionerof x  publicrecordsallegingthathewasnotfurnishedtherecordsthathehadrequested.Thetrialcourt d sustainedtherespondentsmotiontodismissforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbe P granted.Petitionerappeals.Wereverse. < #XvoXXXvo##7XXvo#XvoX7 _Tenn.R.App.P._Ԁ3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtReversedand P Remanded  <   #7Xvo#XvoX.7W.FrankCrawford,_P.J._,_W.S._,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidR.Farmer,  J.andHollyKirby_Lillard_,J.,joined.  HaroldLeeJackson,ProSe  _Donnie_ԀE.Wilson,ShelbyCountyAttorney;ReneeAllenWalker,SeniorAssistantCountyAttorney, ` ForAppellees L   OPINION #7XXvo#XvoX7 $"t! #7XXvow #XvoX7    Petitioner,HaroldLeeJackson,filedapetitioninchancerycourtpursuanttotheTennessee #L# PublicRecordsActagainstJimRout,MayorofShelbyCounty,A.C._Gilless_,SheriffofShelby $8 $ County,andHelenR.Wren,CommanderofRecordsandIdentificationDepartmentofShelby %$!% CountySheriffsOffice.Thepetitionaversthatitisfiledpursuantto_T.C.A._Ԁ X XXXvo#XvoX X X #XvoXXXvoԀ107505torequire &"& respondentstoshowcausewhyhewasdeniedrequestforaccesstopublicrecords.Thepetition '"' allegesthathehasreasontobelievethatwhilehewasincarceratedintheShelbyCountyjailin1974 (#( hewassubjectedtoanexperimentanddescribedthetechnologyas _nanotechnology_.Thepetition )$) allegesthatonFebruary20,2000,hewrotethesheriffsofficerequestingaccesstopublicrecords p*%* relatedtotheallegedexperiment.Heallegesthathewasadvisedbyletterfromthesheriffsoffice \+&+ thatasearchoftherecordswouldbemadefor$18.00andthathesentaneighteendollarmoney H,', orderforthesearch.HeaversthathereceivedareplyApril6,2000,butthatit hadnothingtodo 4-(- withmyrequest,sothesheriffofShelbyCountyjailpublicinformationofficesreplywasdenying  myrequest.Heaversthattheinformationsentwashiscriminalarrestrecordwithnoinformation  whatsoeverconcerninganyexperimentoranythingofthatnature.Heallegesthattherespondents  violatedtheopenrecordsact. t   OnMay26,2000,respondentsfiledamotiontodismisspursuantto_Tenn.R.Civ.P._Ԁ12.02(6) L  forfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegrantedorinthealternativeforsummary 8  judgment.Themotionstatesinpertinentpart: $ t 8  8`   1.TheComplaintfailstostateaclaimuponwhichreliefmaybe  L  granted. 8 ` x` x 8  8`   2.Thereisnogenuineissueofmaterialfact,andRespondentsare   entitledtosummaryjudgmentasamatteroflaw. ` x` x 8  8`   3.Respondentshavenoknowledgeof _Nanotechnology_,norecords   relatedtoit,norhaveRespondentsconductedany _Nanotechnology_ p experimentsonPetitioner.\` x` x 8  8`   4.TheComplaintisfrivolous,andisnotwarrantedbyexistinglaw 4 orfacts. p` x` x 8  8`   5.RespondentsrelyupontheirMemorandumsubmittedtotheCourt, H andupontheAffidavitfiledwiththeCourt.4` x` x   Therecorddoesnotcontaintheaffidavitreferredtointhemotion;therefore,thematteris   consideredasa12.02(6)motion.Thetrialcourtsorderspecificallyprovidesthatthegroundfor  dismissalisfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.Theonlyissueonappealis  whetherthetrialcourterredindismissingthepetition.    Amotiontodismissacomplaintforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted X  teststhelegalsufficiencyofthecomplaint.Itadmitsthetruthofallrelevantandmaterialallegations D! butassertsthatsuchallegationsdonotconstituteacauseofactionasamatteroflaw. Riggsv. 0"  _Burson_ ,941S.W.2d44(Tenn.1997).Obviously,whenconsideringamotiontodismissforfailure #l! tostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted,wearelimitedtotheexaminationofthecomplaint $X" alone. See_Wolcotts_ԀFin.Serv.,Inc.v._McReynolds_ ,807S.W.2d708(Tenn.Ct.App.1990).The $D # basisforthemotionisthattheallegationsinthecomplaintconsideredaloneandtakenastrueare %0!$ insufficienttostateaclaimasamatteroflaw. _Cornpropst_Ԁv.Sloan ,528S.W.2d188(Tenn.1975). &"% Inconsideringsuchamotion,thecourtshouldconstruethecomplaintliberallyinfavorofthe '#& plaintiff,takingalltheallegationsoffactthereinastrue. Cook_Uithoven_Ԁv.Spinnakersof (#' _Rivergate_,Inc. ,878S.W.2d934(Tenn.1994). )$(   |*%)   _T.C.A._Ԁ#XvoXXXvo5 # X XXXvo#XvoX X X* #XvoXXXvoԀ107503(Supp.2000),dealingwiththeopeningofallpublicrecordsforinspection   bycitizensofthestate,providesinpertinentpart:  8  8`   (a)Exceptaprovidedin#XvoXXXvop # X XXXvo#XvoX X X٪!#XvoXXXvoԀ107504(f),allstate,countyand t municipalrecordsandallrecordsmaintainedbytheTennessee ` performingartscentermanagementcorporation,exceptanypublic L  documentsauthorizedtobedestroyedbythecountypublicrecords 8  commissioninaccordancewith#XvoXXXvo!# X XXXvo#XvoX X Xم##XvoXXXvoԀ107404,shallatalltimes,during $ t businesshours,beopenforpersonalinspectionbyanycitizenof  ` Tennessee,andthoseinchargeofsuchrecordsshallnotrefusesuch  L  rightofinspectiontoanycitizen,unlessotherwiseprovidedbystate  8  law.$ ` x` x     (x3   `     h *0  0(#(#*0p(#(#0p(#p(#* (#(#   Theprocedureforenforcingtherightofinspectionisprovidedforin_T.C.A._Ԁ#XvoXXXvo## X XXXvo#XvoX X X'#XvoXXXvoԀ107505   (1999),whichstatesinpertinentpart: p __8  8`   (a)AnycitizenofTennesseewhoshallrequesttherightofpersonal H inspectionofanystate,countyormunicipalrecordasprovidedin#XvoXXXvo]'# X XXXvo#XvoX X X(#XvoXXXvoԀ 4 107503,andwhoserequesthasbeeninwholeorinpartdeniedby  p theofficialand/ordesigneeoftheofficialorthroughanyactor  \ regulationofanyofficialordesigneeofanyofficial,shallbeentitled H topetitionforaccesstoanysuchrecordandtoobtainjudicialreview 4 oftheactionstakentodenytheaccess. ` x` x 8  8`   (b)Suchpetitionshallbefiledinthechancerycourtforthecountyin  whichthecountyormunicipalrecordssoughtaresituated,orinany  othercourtofthatcountyhavingequityjurisdiction....Uponfiling  ofthepetition,thecourtshall,uponrequestofthepetitioningparty, l issueanorderrequiringthedefendantorrespondentpartyorparties X  toimmediatelyappearandshowcause,iftheyhaveany,whythe D! petitionshouldnotbegranted.Aformalwrittenresponsetothe 0"  petitionshallnotberequired,andthegenerallyapplicableperiodsof #l! filingsuchresponseshallnotapplyintheinterestofexpeditious $X" hearings.Thecourtmaydirectthattherecordsbeingsoughtbe $D # submittedundersealforreviewbythecourtandnootherparty.The %0!$ decisionofthecourtonthepetitionshallconstituteafinaljudgment &"% onthemerits.'#&` x` x     (xx      `     h *0  0(#(#*0p(#(#0p(#p(#*)$((#(#   |*%)   Areviewofthepetitionfiledinthiscaserevealsthatthereisnoallegationthatthepetitioner   requestedtherightofpersonalinspectionoftherecords,noristhereanyallegationthatthosein  chargeoftherecordsrefusedanyrightofinspectionrequestedbythepetitioner.However,thisCourt  haspreviouslyruledthatstrictcompliancewiththe personalappearancerequirementofthestatute t isnotrequired.In _Waller_Ԁv.Bryant ,16S.W.3d770(Tenn.Ct.App.1999),oneoftheissues ` presentedforreviewwaswhethertheinabilityofthepersonseekingtherecords topresenthimself L  inpersontoinspectandrequestcopiesofthedocumentsprohibitshimfromobtainingthosecopies 8  ifheisotherwiseentitledtoreceivethemunderthepublicrecordsact.Inthisregard,theCourt $ t said:  ` 8  8`    #XvoXXXvo)#ItisthisCourt'sdutytoapplyratherthanconstruethe  8  languageofthePublicRecordsAct,sincetheintentofthe $  Legislatureisrepresentedbyclearandunambiguouslanguage. See   _Cammuse_Ԁv.DavidsonCo.DistrictAttorney ,No.01A019709CH   00503(Tenn.App.,filedMarch24,1999[noappl.perm.app.]).   WhileAppelleesdonothaveanobligationtoreviewandsearchtheir   recordspursuanttoaPublicRecordsActrequest,theydohavethe t clearobligationtoproducethoserecordsforinspection,unless ` otherwiseprovidedbystatelaw,andtoprovideacopyorcopiesof L anysuchrecordrequestedbysuchcitizen,uponthepaymentofa 8 reasonablechargeorfeetherefor. SeeTennesseanv.Electrical $t PowerBoardofNashville ,979S.W.2d297,303(Tenn.1998).If d thecitizenrequestinginspectionandcopyingofthedocumentscan P sufficientlyidentifythosedocumentssothatAppelleesknowwhich < documentstocopy,arequirementthatthecitizenmustappearin ( persontorequestacopyofthosedocumentswouldplaceformover  substanceandnotbeconsistentwiththeclearintentofthe  Legislature.TheadoptionoftheAppelleespositionwouldmeanthat  anycitizenwhowasunabletopersonallyappearbeforetherecords  custodianwouldbeunabletoobtaincopiesofthedocuments t pursuanttothePublicRecordsAct.Thisrestrictionwouldprohibit `  allTennesseecitizenswhoareunable,becauseofhealthreasonsor L! otherphysicallimitations,toappearbeforetherecordscustodian 8"  fromobtainingcopiesofpublicdocumentspursuanttothePublic $#t! RecordsAct.Sucharesultisnotconsistentwiththeclearintentof $`" theLegislature,andthisCourtwillnotinterpretthisstatuteinsucha $L # wayastoprohibitthosecitizens,orthosecitizensincarcerated,from %8!$ therightsprovidedbythePublicRecordsAct.Appelleescanfixa &$"% chargeorfeepercopysoastorecovertheactualcostofproducing '#& anddeliveringthecopies. Id.XvoXXXvo#7XXvo #XvoX7 (#'` x` x  Id. at77374. *%)  p+&*   Itappearsfromtheexhibitstoappellantspetitioninthetrialcourtthatidentifyingdatawas  furnishedconcerningtherecordssoughtandthattherecordscustodianhadagreedtofurnishrecords  forthepaymentofthefee.Respondentsmotiontodismissstatesinpart:  8  8`   3.Respondentshavenoknowledgeof _Nanotechnology_,norecords ` relatedtoit,norhaveRespondentsconductedany _Nanotechnology_ L  experimentsonPetitioner.8 ` x` x   Noaffidavit,noranyothertypeofsworntestimonywasfiledbyrespondents._T.C.A._Ԁ#XvoXXXvo?# X XXXvo# q  X X?# X X  q#XvoX X X١C##7XXvoC#77XvoX7Ԁ107  ` 505(c)providesasfollows:  L  8  8`   (c)Theburdenofproofforjustificationof_nondisclosure_Ԁofrecords $  soughtshallbeupontheofficialand/ordesigneeoftheofficialof   thoserecordsandthejustificationforthe_nondisclosure_Ԁmustbe   shownbyapreponderanceoftheevidence. ` x` x   Therefore,thecomplaintstatesacauseofactionuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.Certainly, p thisdoesnotindicateinanywayadecisiononthemeritsofthecase. \   Accordingly,theorderofthetrialcourtdismissingappellantspetitionisreversed,andthe 4 caseisremandedtothetrialcourtforsuchfurtherproceedingsasnecessary.Costsoftheappealare  p assessedagainsttherespondents,JimRout,MayorofShelbyCounty;A.C._Gilless_,SheriffofShelby  \ CountyJail;andHelenR.Wren,CommanderofPublicRecordsattheShelbyCountyJail. H #XvoXXXvoLD##7XXvokD#0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#__________________________________________F(#(#    `    W.FRANKCRAWFORD,PRESIDINGJUDGE,_W.S._