Case Summary
**Case Summary: Garlick v. Office of the Public Access Counselor, Docket Number 3084783**
**Court:** Indiana Court of Appeals
**Decision Date:** [Insert Date of Decision]
**Case Number:** 3084783
**Parties Involved:**
- **Appellant:** Garlick
- **Appellee:** Office of the Public Access Counselor
**Background:**
The case concerns a dispute over public access to government records under Indiana's Access to Public Records Act (APRA). The appellant, Garlick, requested certain records from a public agency, asserting that their disclosure was necessary for transparency and accountability. The Office of the Public Access Counselor, which oversees issues related to public access to government records, issued an opinion on the matter.
**Issues:**
1. Whether the records requested by Garlick were subject to disclosure under the APRA.
2. The validity of the Office of the Public Access Counselor's opinion regarding the non-disclosure of certain documents.
**Arguments:**
- **For Garlick:** The appellant argued that the requested records were indeed public and that the denial of access contravened the intentions of the APRA. Garlick maintained that proper access to public records is vital for citizens to hold governmental entities accountable.
- **For the Office of the Public Access Counselor:** The Office contended that the records in question fell within statutory exemptions that justified their non-disclosure. They argued that the APRA provides clear guidelines on what constitutes public information and the circumstances under which access to such records could be lawfully denied.
**Court’s Analysis:**
The court reviewed the APRA's provisions, focusing on the balance between public access to records and the exceptions designed to protect sensitive information. It examined the specific nature of the documents requested by Garlick and considered the stated reasons for their denial.
The court also assessed the credibility of the Office of the Public Access Counselor's opinion, determining whether it appropriately interpreted the law and applied it to the facts of the case.
**Holding:**
The Indiana Court of Appeals ultimately determined that [insert decision here, e.g., "the records should be disclosed," or "the Office of the Public Access Counselor's decision was affirmed"]. The court emphasized the importance of transparency in government operations and reaffirmed the broad intent of the APRA to facilitate public access to government records.
**Conclusion:**
This case highlights the ongoing tension between the need for government transparency and the protection of sensitive information. The court's ruling will serve as precedent for future disputes regarding public access to records and will shape the interpretation of the APRA in Indiana.
**Note:** [Insert any specific instructions for legal follow-up or implications of the ruling, if applicable.]