AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In 2018, Plaintiff Nancy Henry filed a complaint alleging timesheet fraud by Kenneth Whetham, a livestock inspector employed by the New Mexico Livestock Board. Following an investigation by the Office of the State Auditor (OSA), which found evidence supporting the allegations, the Board initiated its own investigation through an external firm, Thompson & Associates. Henry requested a copy of the investigative report (the Whetham Report) under New Mexico’s Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA), which was denied by the Board on the grounds of exemption under IPRA (paras 2-5).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: Denied Henry's petition to compel the Board to make the Whetham Report available for inspection, finding the report exempt from disclosure under IPRA (para 7).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred in concluding the Whetham Report was entirely exempt from disclosure under IPRA, asserting that factual matters within the report concerning misconduct by a public officer should be disclosed, while agreeing that matters of opinion related to discipline are exempt (paras 9, 18).
• Defendant-Appellee: Maintained that the Whetham Report is exempt from disclosure under IPRA as it contains matters of opinion in personnel files, arguing that the entire report is exempt and that in camera review by the district court was unnecessary (paras 5, 8).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Whetham Report is exempt from disclosure under IPRA Section 14-2-1(C) as “letters or memoranda that are matters of opinion in personnel files” (para 9).
• Whether IPRA Section 14-2-9(A) requires the custodian of records to separate fact from opinion within documents and disclose the factual content (para 18).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the Whetham Report is exempt from disclosure under IPRA in its entirety and that in camera review of the report was unnecessary (paras 24-25).

Reasons

• Judges Yohalem, Medina, and Baca: Concluded that IPRA was correctly applied by the district court. The appellate court agreed with the district court's interpretation that the entire Whetham Report is exempt from disclosure under IPRA Section 14-2-1(C), emphasizing that the statute exempts "letters or memoranda" that are matters of opinion in personnel files in their entirety. The court also found that Section 14-2-9(A) does not require the separation of fact from opinion for documents exempt under Section 14-2-1(C). The court relied on statutory interpretation and precedent to affirm the district court's ruling, noting that the purpose of the exemption is to protect the confidentiality of the employer/employee relationship (paras 9-23).