Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth.

4 Citing cases

  1. Contreraz v. City of Tacoma

    3:22-cv-05106 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 15, 2024)   Cited 2 times

    See Dkt. No. 93 at 7, 9; see also Dkt. No. 89 ¶ 10. TPD argues the CAD logs are not relevant, but each log references incidents at Wright Park on July 12, 2020, and they thus plainly respond to Contreraz's request. See Dkt. No. 99 at 6; see also Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth., 327 P.3d 600, 607 (Wash. 2013) (“insofar as certain public records are responsive . . . [i]f no exemption applies generally to the relevant types of records or information, the requested public records must be disclosed.”)

  2. Padgett v. Dep't of Corr.

    9 Wn. App. 2d 1040 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019)

    Generally, we review challenges to an agency action under the PRA de novo. RCW 42.56.550(3); Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth., Ill. Wn.2d 417, 428, 327 P.3d 600 (2013). Whether DOC violated the PRA was decided on summary judgment.

  3. White v. Clark Cnty.

    199 Wn. App. 929 (Wash. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 11 times
    In White II, Division One joined in the conclusion of Division Two's then recently-released opinion that the requested records were exempt by virtue of an "other statute."

    ¶26 As discussed above, we hold that tabulated ballots are exempt in their entirety from disclosure under the PRA. RCW 29A.60.110 and WAC 434-261-045 provide categorical exemptions, not conditional ones. SeeResident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth. , 177 Wash.2d 417, 434, 327 P.3d 600 (2013) (noting categorical exemptions limit a particular type of information or record). As a result, whether the ballots can be redacted to address specific secrecy concerns is immaterial. Seeid. at 433, 437, 327 P.3d 600 ("[I]f a type of record is exempted, then meaningful redaction generally is impossible," unless redaction will transform the record into an entirely different type of record). The ballots are exempt from production without qualification.

  4. West v. Port Olympia

    333 P.3d 488 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 12 times

    RCW 42.56.550(3); Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth., 177 Wash.2d 417, 428, 300 P.3d 376, amended on denial of recons., ––– Wash.2d ––––, 327 P.3d 600 (2013). In reviewing a PRA request, we stand in the same position as the trial court.