Utah Department of Administrative Services

Division of Archives & Records Service

State Records Committee Appeal 99-14


BARBARA HAYNES, Appellant vs.

Case No. 99-14

Appellant, Barbara Haynes, sought an order of the Committee requiring Appellee, her employer, to supply her a copy of "grievance tapes" of a hearing between her and her supervisor, her "department file" and a "copy of the Noise Survey Results conducted as a result of [her] hearing loss." Appellant did not dispute that any records of the type requested are now properly releasable to Appellant, but asserted that until recently the records were part of a pending investigation file. Appellee stated that since the investigation is now closed, the requested records have been released to Appellant. Appellant acknowledged receiving some records from Appellee on the day of the Records Committee hearing (November 10, 1999), but asserts, by her own comment and through comment of another person at the hearing, that there was a much larger file of materials regarding her, at least some of which she has not been supplied.

The appeal was heard by the Records Committee on November 10, 1999. Appellant appeared in her own behalf, and presented testimony and argument. Appellee was represented by Mark A. Sorenson, Esq., and presented testimony and argument. Both parties had presented written documentation in advance of the hearing. The State Records Committee, having reviewed the written materials submitted by the parties and having heard the testimony and argument of the parties, now issues the following decision and order:


Appellee asserts that it has supplied to Appellant all the requested records. There being no practicable way of disputing that assertion, the Appeal must be considered moot. However, the Committee observes the serious and repeated failure of Appellee to respond to Appellant's requests, even with a denial as called for by GRAMA, or to inform the Committee ahead of the hearing what Appellee's position was or that it intended to supply the records at the hearing.


WHEREFORE, it is ordered, based on Appellee's assertion it has supplied to Appellant all the requested records and that it will promptly supply to Appellant any further documents it generates, that Appellant's request for the indicated record is moot.


The terms of this section titled "Right to Appeal" are required by statute to be included in the Order. Either party may appeal this Decision and Order to District Court. The petition for review must be filed no later than thirty (30) days after the date of this Order. The petition for judicial review must be a complaint. The complaint and the appeals process are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and by Utah Code Ann. 63-2-404 and 63-2-502(7). In an appeal to the District Court, the parties shall be the same as in the proceeding before the Committee, though the Records Committee shall be added as a party defendant under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-404(1)(c). The Court is required to make its decision de novo. In order to protect rights of appeal, a party may wish to seek advice from an attorney.

Entered this 15th day of November, 1999.

Betsy L. Ross,
Chair State Records Committee