Pulaski County Circuit Judge Morgan "Chip" Welch on Wednesday issued an amended opinion and order that dissolved the stay he imposed in a case in which he had ruled that the Arkansas State Police was improperly withholding information on traffic-accident reports.
In the original June 23 ruling, Welch had granted a 60-day stay. But in granting plaintiff Daniel Wren's motion to dissolve that stay, he reversed that decision Wednesday and once again ruled in favor of the Little Rock attorney, who sued state police in May for access to crash reports after his Freedom of Information Act request for the records was denied.
Lawyers from the Arkansas attorney general's office, who are representing the state police in the case, had requested the stay to allow time for an appeal. State police still will be able to appeal the judge's decision, but the ruling will now go into effect after a 10-day stay.
M. Keith Wren -- an attorney for Daniel Wren, who is his partner at the Wren Law Firm -- said he was unsure whether the clock on the 10-day stay began after the June ruling or Wednesday's ruling. To err on the side of caution, M. Keith Wren said he would wait 10 days before trying to enforce the ruling.
A law passed last year requires that the personal information of minors be redacted from crash reports. In response to that law, state police implemented a new policy in January that prohibited the bulk inspection of all crash reports, saying redacting minors' information was an administrative burden.
Then in June, the agency stopped releasing nearly all personal information on crash reports available to the public. In doing so, state police cited the 21-year-old federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act.
Welch's June 23 order said crash reports are not motor vehicle records and therefore not protected by the Drivers Privacy Protection Act. Welch also said the policy implemented in January violated the state's Freedom of Information Act.
M. Keith Wren asked in court documents dated June 26 that the stay be lifted because previous stays have been granted "to preserve the status quo ante if it appears that the failure to do so would result in irreparable harm." He argued that there was no chance for such harm in this case.
Delena Hurst, an assistant attorney general, asked in court documents dated Monday for the stay to remain in place. The same day, she filed a motion for clarification, asking Welch whether the January or June procedure was enjoined.
That motion for clarification was cited by Welch in his order to lift the stay.
"[Arkansas State Police's] revelation and explanation concerning the subsequent policy lends credence to Plaintiff's argument that a stay should be lifted inasmuch as Defendant's Motion makes it clear there is no 'status quo' of any significant tenure to protect," Welch wrote. "The new June 5, 2015 policy is barely a month old."
In the amended opinion and order issued Wednesday, Welch clarified that both policies violated the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act.
"Obviously, we're pleased," M. Keith Wren said of Wednesday's ruling. "This ruling is clearer than the previous ruling. Everybody knows where they stand."
It will now be up to the state police to decide whether it will follow the ruling or appeal the judge's decision, he said.
State police spokesman Bill Sadler referred all questions about the case to the attorney general's office.
Judd Deere, spokesman for Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, said he could not comment on the new order because it's an ongoing matter. He added that a decision about appealing the case has not been made.
Metro on 07/09/2015