CHARLESTON — The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision and emphasized that Freedom of Information Act exemptions should not be used to withhold information without proper scrutiny and transparency in government is key.
The court reversed the lower court's decision to dismiss Tax Analysts' complaint and remanded the case for further proceedings. The State Tax Department must provide a Vaughn index and justification for withholding the requested documents under the FOIA exemption, according to the March 15 Supreme Court opinion.
Chief Justice Tim Armstead authored the majority opinion.
Tax Analysts, a nonprofit organization that disseminates tax law updates, sought field audit and training manuals from the West Virginia State Tax Department under FOIA.
The State Tax Department denied the request, citing an exemption in the FOIA statute. Tax Analysts then filed a lawsuit, claiming the department improperly withheld the documents.
The Kanawha Circuit Court initially sided with the department, granting their motion to dismiss without requiring the department to justify its exemption claim. Tax Analysts appealed that decision.
The central issue for the court is whether the department's denial under the FOIA exemption was justified and whether the circuit court erred in dismissing Tax Analysts' complaint.
The FOIA statute emphasizes a policy of open government, allowing for disclosure unless specific exemptions apply, Armstead writes. The burden of proof falls on the department to show why the requested documents are exempt.
“Without requiring the (Tax Division) to justify or establish the applicability of the statutory exemption as it relates to the documents or information contained within them, the circuit court accepted the Department’s position that disclosure was not required,” Armstead wrote in the majority opinion. “…We find that the circuit court erred by granting the (division’s) motion to dismiss without requiring the (division) to follow the established procedure to determine whether the documents, or portions of the documents, were subject to disclosure.”
In the initial FOIA dispute stage, where the documents are unknown to both parties, dismissal is generally discouraged unless it's clear the documents fit a specific exemption. The court has previously stated that exemptions to FOIA should be narrowly construed, favoring disclosure.
The Kanawha Circuit Court erred by accepting the department's broad interpretation of the exemption without proper justification.
The exemption cited by the department is specific to "standards used for the selection of returns for examination," yet the department claimed it covered all documents related to auditing processes, a significant expansion beyond the statute's language, according to the Supreme Court.
Additionally, the department failed to produce a Vaughn index, a detailed justification for withholding documents under FOIA exemptions.
The index would have allowed the court to assess whether the requested materials indeed fell under the claimed exemption. The department's blanket refusal to provide any documents, citing the exemption, was not sufficient under FOIA standards, Armstead writes.
The Supreme Court emphasized that exemptions to FOIA should be strictly construed, and agencies must provide specific justifications for withholding documents.
The department's failure to provide a Vaughn index and affidavit detailing the harm of disclosure was a critical error. The Kanawha Circuit Court should not have accepted the Department's broad interpretation without proper evidence.
Attorneys for the parties declined to comment on the Supreme Court decision.
West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case number: 22-0491
