By TJ Keilty 

A public information request can support potential or concurrent litigation. The Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) facilitates public access to government records, ensuring transparency and accountability. The corollary federal process is known as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  This article seeks to summarize the process for a PIA request in Maryland and attempts to address potential challenges and issues that may arise in the course of these requests. 

 

The Public Information Act (PIA) 

The Maryland PIA is designed to promote transparency by granting public access to government records. It applies to state, county, and municipal agencies, providing a structured method for individuals to request and receive public information.  Here are the basic steps to follow in order to initiate a PIA request: 

1. Identify the Custodian of Records: Determine which government agency holds the records you need. The Maryland Attorney General's website lists records custodians, which helps direct your request appropriately. 

2. Drafting the Request: Clearly and specifically describe the records you seek, including details such as dates and types of documents. This specificity aids the custodian in locating the records and reduces processing time. 

3. Submitting the Request: Requests can be submitted via email, mail, or an online portal, depending on the agency. For instance, a request to the Maryland Office of the Attorney General can be emailed to their PIA representative. 

4. Awaiting a Response: Agencies typically acknowledge receipt within 10 working days and respond within 30 days. If more time is needed, the agency must notify the requester of the delay. 

Public information requests ensure governmental transparency and accountability, allowing citizens to monitor government activities and hold officials responsible for their actions.  These requests are a cost-effective method of gathering information compared to hiring private investigators or conducting extensive research, with most requests requiring minimal fees.  These requests may also provide access to information that may not be in the actual possession of the defendant and can be used to support litigation. 

 

The Potential Challenges Associated with PIA Requests 

It is important to familiarize yourself with PIA exemptions to understand what information may be legally withheld. This knowledge can help frame requests to minimize redactions and denials. In case of denial, understanding the legal grounds for exemptions aids in better appeals or legal challenges. 

Certain records may be exempt from disclosure due to privacy concerns or legal protections, and agencies may redact sensitive information, limiting the usefulness of the obtained records.  It is helpful to ensure that your request is clear and specific to avoid vague responses. If the agency seeks clarification, provide detailed descriptions to help them locate the records more efficiently.  

The Public Access Ombudsman can mediate disputes between requesters and record custodians, aiming to resolve issues amicably. Additionally, the Public Information Act Compliance Board reviews complaints to ensure PIA compliance. 

 

Incorporating Case Law 

1. Differentiating PIA from Civil Discovery 

In Hammen v. Balt. Co. Police Dept., the court highlighted that the PIA's purpose differs from civil discovery rules. While the PIA allows broad access to public records, civil discovery in litigation is more restrictive, focusing on eliminating confusion regarding litigation facts (373 Md. 440, 454 (2003); Rodriguez v. Clarke, 400 Md. 39, 57 (2007)). 

2. Balancing PIA and Litigation Needs 

Public records obtained via PIA requests can be useful in litigation, even if they are not discoverable through civil discovery. For instance, Mezu v. Morgan State Univ. clarified that PIA exceptions do not create privileges against production in civil cases (269 F.R.D. 565, 576 (D. Md. 2010)). 

3. Ensuring Accessibility and Proportionality 

The PIA mandates that public records be provided at the least cost and delay. However, if the cost is disproportionate or the records are not reasonably accessible, a court order may be necessary to obtain the documents, emphasizing the importance of proportionality in requests (Baltimore Police Dep’t v. Open Just. Baltimore, 2023 WL 5616318, at *2 (Md. Aug. 31, 2023)). 

 

Practical Examples of PIA  

1. Personal Injury  

In personal injury lawsuits it may be helpful to try to obtain accident reports, emergency response reports or surveillance footage of the incident.  These types of documents can sometimes be obtained through a PIA request.   

Example: 

A plaintiff sues Baltimore City related to a slip and fall injury on the sidewalk.  The plaintiff submits a PIA request to obtain prior reported incidents establishing notice of a particular defect.  The history of prior reported incidents sufficiently establishes that the City had notice of the defect and failed to remediate. 

2. Medical Negligence & Nursing Home 

In medical negligence or nursing home negligence cases, it may be helpful to submit requests to a licensing or credentialing board related to the providers at issue or it may be beneficial to obtain records related to a governmental audit of a particular facility.  These types of records can be requested through PIA requests. 

Example: 

A plaintiff sues a nursing home related to a bed sore infection.  The plaintiff submits a PIA request to obtain information related to prior reported incidents from CMS audits and obtains information related to insufficient staffing levels.  Utilizing this information the Plaintiff can establish at trial that the facility failed to staff appropriately, and this results in a pattern of bed sore infections among patients at the facility.    

3. Civil Rights 

In civil rights cases, whether police misconduct or correctional healthcare, certain surveillance footage, incident reports, policies and investigative reports can be obtained through a PIA request.   

Example: 

A Plaintiff files a lawsuit against Baltimore County alleging civil rights violations related to a suicide at the Baltimore County Detention Center. The plaintiff obtains video footage covering the 24-hour period before the suicide to establish no welfare checks were completed during the 8 hours before Plaintiff’s suicide. This footage provides crucial evidence that demonstrates a pattern of behavior that supports claims of civil rights violations for deliberate indifference. 

 

Biography 

TJ Keilty is an attorney at Keilty Bonadio, LLC. TJ is a graduate of James Madison University and earned his JD from the University of Baltimore School of Law. He litigates qui tam, products liability, and medical malpractice cases throughout the country. TJ is a member of the MAJ Board of Governors and an active contributor and editor for the Maryland Association for Justice Trial Reporter. TJ can be reached at tkeilty@kblitigation.com.