COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED January 9, 1997 |
NOTICE |
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of
Appeals. See § 808.10 and
Rule 809.62, Stats. |
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the
official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. |
No. 95-3422
STATE
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF
APPEALS
DISTRICT IV
MARK ANTHONY ADELL,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL SULLIVAN,
PHILLIP KOENIG,
and JAMES A. EHLERT,
Respondents-Respondents.
APPEAL from orders of
the circuit court for Dane County:
DANIEL R. MOESER, Judge. Affirmed.
Before Eich, C.J.,
Roggensack and Deininger, JJ.
PER
CURIAM. Mark Anthony Adell appeals from the trial court's
orders denying his motion for damages and costs in this open records case and
denying his motion for reconsideration.
Because we hold that the trial court correctly denied damages and costs
under §§ 19.35(1)(am) and 19.37(2)(b), Stats.,
we affirm.
Appellant, an inmate at
Racine Correctional Institute (RCI), requested various records about
himself. RCI's response was not timely
and included only part of appellant's request because the Division of Intensive
Sanctions had a portion of his file, which required additional transfer and
viewing arrangements. On the basis of
this response, appellant filed a mandamus action and thereafter, RCI provided
appellant with the records he sought. See
§ 19.37, Stats. Appellant subsequently moved for damages and
costs under § 19.37(2)(a), Stats. That section provides in relevant portion:
[T]he
court shall award reasonable attorney fees, damages of not less than $100, and
other actual costs to the requester if the requester prevails in whole or in
substantial part in any action ... relating to access to a record or part of a
record under s. 19.35(1)(a).
The trial court denied
the motion on the grounds that § 19.37(2)(b), Stats., applies. That
section provides in relevant portion:
In
any action filed ... relating to access to a record or part of a record under
s. 19.35(1)(am), if the court finds that the authority acted in a wilful or
intentional manner, the court shall award the individual actual damages
sustained by the individual as a consequence of the failure.
Section 19.35(1)(am), Stats., relates to requests, such as
that here, by individuals for records "containing personally identifiable
information pertaining to the individual." Under this statutory scheme, § 19.37(2)(a), Stats., provides for damages when a
requester prevails in whole or in part, but § 19.37(2)(b) provides an
exception to the type of information provided by § 19.35(1)(am). Damages in § 19.35(1)(am) cases are to
be awarded only when the records custodian ("authority") acts in a
wilful or intentional manner. Section
19.37(2)(b).
The State acknowledges
that RCI responded slowly to appellant's request. However, it is undisputed that RCI did provide appellant with all
the records he requested. In our
analysis, the record does not sustain a finding that RCI "wilfully"
or "intentionally" failed to comply with appellant's request. Therefore, we affirm the trial court's
order.
By the Court.—Orders
affirmed.
This opinion will not be
published. See Rule 809.23(1)(b)5, Stats.