State v. Thomason (2001) Any records obtained or created by the Attorney General pursuant of the Oklahoma Medicaid Integrity Act are confidential and not subject to the ORA - unless the AG authorizes its use in relation to legal, administrative, or judicial proceedings.
Farrimond v. Fisher (2000) Records that come into the Insurance Commissioner's possession, as a court order involving a receivership action, are not "government records" under the ORA.
Transportation Information Services v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections (1998) A private, commercial enterprise is entitled to records requested from the DOC pursuant to the ORA.
Sloan v. Sprouse (1998) The Court allowed the sealing of Search Warrant Affidavit. NOTE: The dissent by Lane argued that the ORA applies - there is no provision within the ORA exempting affidavits from the general rule that documents filed with the court are subject to disclosure.
Bd. of Medical Licensure v. Miglaccio (1996) A physician's disciplinary records by the State Licensing Board are public record subject to the ORA.
McVarish v. New Horizons Community Counseling and Mental Health Services, Inc. (1995) If a record's request substantially disrupts an agency's day-to-day operations, the agency may charge a search and copying fee.
Williams v. Austin (1994) The ORA does not contain provisions that authorize a public body to supply free copies of documents to persons who state they are indigent.
City of Lawton v. Moore (1993) The ORA relieves public bodies from an obligation to provide procedural protections that are not specifically required by the ORA or another statute. NOTE: This case reflects the legislative intent of the added language to the ORA.
Cummings & Associates, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City ex rel. Oklahoma City Police Dept. (1993) Law enforcement records that are not required to be released still may be ordered released by a court, where a court finds the public interest or the interest of an individual outweighs the reason for denial. Traffic collision reports were not ordered released in this case.
Lincoln Bank & Trust Company v. Oklahoma Tax Commission (1992) OK Tax Commission could obtain banking customer financial data for purposes of enforcing Unclaimed Property laws- these records remain private though and not subject to disclosure because they are private records under the ORA.
Merrill v. Oklahoma Tax Com’n (1992) The intention of the ORA is to favor disclosure of information over its withholding.
Saxon v. Macy (1990) Case was dismissed as moot, since the Appellee/Defendant no longer possessed the requested records.
Milton v. Hayes (1989) The Oklahoma Election Code, not the ORA, provides the exclusive means of access to election materials, specifically the retention of cast ballots.
Tulsa Tribune Co. v. Oklahoma Horse Racing Com’n (1986) Dealt with protective orders over records, so that the records would not be subject to disclosure pursuant to the ORA. NOTE: Overruled by a 1988 statutory change; see also Okla. Public Employees Ass'n v. St.
Tulsa Tribune Co. v. Fulton (1984) Publicly funded spending reports were not exempt from disclosure, when lacking evidence showing an articulated statutory exception and when promised by a state agency to remain confidential.
