Absent Bad Faith No PRA Sanctions for Washington Prisoners

by Mark Wilson

On October 29, 2013, the Washington State Court of Appeals held that prisoners are ineligible for Public Records Act (PRA) violation sanctions, without a showing of bad faith. The court also held that prison surveillance video recordings are exempt from disclosure.

Washington prisoner Derek E. Gronquist made an August 5, 2007 PRA request to the Department of Corrections (DOC) for records and video surveillance related to a June 17, 2007 assault at the Clallam Bay Corrections Center. On October 26, 2007, DOC disclosed 96 pages of responsive documents, but inadvertently omitted one page. It denied disclosure of the surveillance videos, claiming that they were exempt under Washington statute (RCW) 42.56.420(2)(2005).

On July 27, 2009, Gronquist filed a superior court action, seeking sanctions for nondisclosure of the surveillance video recordings and the inadvertently omitted page, which was produced during the litigation.

The court found that DOC had violated the PRA by withholding the one page, but it had done so inadvertently, not in bad faith. The court ordered DOC to pay Gronquist a PRA penalty of $15 per day for 24 days, for a total of $260. It also held that the video surveillance was exempt from disclosure under RCW 42.56.240(1).

On July 22, 2011, while Gronquist’s action was still pending, the legislature enacted RCW 42.56.565(1), barring an award of PRA penalties to prisoners unless the court finds that the agency acted in bad faith.

Gronquist appealed, arguing that the court did not award the proper amount of PRA sanctions and the surveillance video is not exempt from disclosure.

The Washington Court of Appeals found that RCW 42.56.565(1) applied to Gronquist because the superior court had not yet entered a final judgment when the statute became effective. As such, the Court held that “Gronquist is not statutorily entitled to any amount of PRA penalties.”

It also concluded that prison surveillance video is exempt from disclosure under RCW 42.56.240. The Court rejected Gronquist’s reliance on Prison Legal News v. Department of Corrections, 154 Wn.2d 628, 115 P.3d 316 (2005), finding that it was distinguishable and not controlling. See: Gronquist v. Washington, 177 Wn. App. 389 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013), review denied.

Related legal case