Open Records Policy

Courts and Judicial Branch agencies are not subject to the Texas Public Information Act nor to the federal Freedom of Information Act. A Judicial Branch agency means an office, board, commission, or other similar entity that is in the Judicial Branch and that serves an administrative function for a court, including a task force or committee created by a court or judge. Records held by courts and Judicial Branch agencies that do not pertain to their adjudicative function are considered judicial records, which are governed by Rule 12 of the Rules of Judicial Administration.

Access to Court Case Records

Access to court case records is governed by common law, statutory law and court rules. Generally, the custodian of court case records is the Clerk of the Court. Neither the Office of the Attorney General nor the Special Committee of the Regional Presiding Judges can consider appeals from denials of access to court case records.

Access to Judicial Records

Access to judicial records (records other than court case records) is governed by Rule 12 of the Rules of Judicial Administration. The custodian of judicial records is usually the judge of the court. In the case of judicial records held by a Judicial Branch agency, the director of the agency is the custodian of the records.

A request to inspect or copy a judicial record must be in writing, must include sufficient information to identify the record, and must be directed to the custodian of the record.

Appealing Denial of Access

Appeals from denials of access to judicial records are to be filed with the Administrative Director of the Office of Court Administration. Appeals must be filed not later than 30 days after the date the notice of a denial is received. Petitions for review of a denial must comply with Rule 12.9 of the Rules of Judicial Administration.

Appeals are decided by a committee of presiding judges who issue written opinions explaining the committee's decision.

Rule 12 Decisions
Decision # Date Description
17-012 09/13/2017  
17-011 09/08/2017  
17-010 09/06/2017  
17-009 06/19/2017 A court, judicial agency, or records custodian is not required to respond to or to comply with a request for a judicial record from or on behalf of an individual who is imprisoned or confined in a correctional facility.
17-008 08/16/2017  
17-007 08/02/2017  
17-006 07/17/2017 A document prepared by Respondent's staff analyzing claims in a case filed with Respondent pertains to Respondent's adjudicative function and is not a judicial record as defined by Rule 12.
17-005 07/18/2017 Records created and filed in connection with a specific court case are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12; however, judges are reminded that the public has a right to inspect and copy them.
17-004 06/20/2017 Telephone bills are judicial records under Rule 12; a judicial officer who receives a request for a judicial record not in his or her custody must attempt to ascertain who the records custodian is and refer the request to that person.
17-003 06/20/2017 Telephone bills are judicial records under Rule 12; a judicial officer who receives a request for a judicial record not in his or her custody must attempt to ascertain who the records custodian is and refer the request to that person.
17-002 05/24/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.  Additionally, if the requested information is available in a record that can be provided to Petitioner, Respondent should advise Petitioner so that Petitioner can request the appropriate record.
17-001 05/22/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.  Additionally, judge should have referred the request to proper custodian.
16-024 03/07/2017 Records related to a probationer in a case file maintained by a probation officer who supervises probationers are records that are created, produced or filed in connection with criminal cases that have been before the court that placed the probationer under community supervision, therefore, they are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-023 03/08/2017 Records created and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-022 01/26/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-021 01/26/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-019;    16-020 01/23/2017 An inquiry is not a request for records, so the panel is without authority to address Respondent’s failure to respond; records created, produced, and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-018 03/08/2017 Records that reflect the time that the judge left his office on one specific date including but not limited to calendar entries, computer usage records, computer log-in and log-out records, emails opened or sent, phone calls received or made, and security pass data for the judge’s garage door and elevator door, if they exist, are not exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b) or (i); however, the special panel notes that its decision was reached without the benefit of reviewing the responsive records and cannot ensure that they are not exempt from disclosure.
16-017 11/30/2016 Records related to a probationer in a case file maintained by a probation officer who supervises probationers are records that are created, produced or filed in connection with criminal cases that have been before the court that placed the probationer under community supervision, therefore, are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12; records that evaluate the performance of a community supervision officer are confidential and should be withheld under Rule 12.5(i); the redacted information submitted for in camera review, except for two noted items, is  exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(c) and (k); neither the fact that a record is not subject to Rule 12 nor a decision making this determination should be used as a basis for withholding records.
16-016 11/29/2016 Records related to a probationer in a case file maintained by a probation officer who supervises probationers are records that are created, produced or filed in connection with criminal cases that have been before the court that placed the probationer under community supervision, therefore, are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12; records that evaluate the performance of a community supervision officer are confidential and should be withheld under Rule 12.5(i); the redacted information submitted for in camera review, except for two noted items, is  exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(c) and (k); neither the fact that a record is not subject to Rule 12 nor a decision making this determination should be used as a basis for withholding records.
16-015 12/06/2016 Records created and filed in connection with a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-014 11/10/2016 Rule 12 does not require: that certified copies be provided to a requestor; that a record be created responsive to an information request; any form of authentication or certification of records; that the records be provided in a specific format; a document be altered to fit the purposes of the requestor.
16-013 10/25/2016

Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.

16-012 10/05/2016 Respondent is not required to create records responsive to an information request; records that are created, produced and filed in connection with matters that are or have been before a court are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-011 06/13/2016 Reports required to be submitted to OCA containing the total number of juvenile and minor cases by offense type do not pertain to the court's adjudicative function and are subject to Rule 12; the remaining information requested by Petitioner consists of case records that are not subject to Rule 12.
16-010 06/07/2016 Respondent is not required to create records responsive to an information request; the panel is unable to make a determination regarding a record's exemption without reviewing the record. 
16-009 06/06/2016 Lists of persons who have requested or have been ordered to take driver's safety class pursuant to Art. 45.01 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are case records, and the special panel is without authority to issue a decision in matters involving case records.
16-008 06/01/2016 Respondents complied with Petitioner's requests for information that is subject to Rule 12; the questions submitted to Respondents are not requests for judicial records that are subject to Rule 12.
16-007 04/29/2016 Respondent did not have records responsive to request; a records custodian may be subject to sanctions under the Code of Judicial Conduct for knowingly failing to comply with Rule 12.
16-006 04/25/2016 Requested records – which were submitted for an in camera inspection -- are judicial records, but only one of the records is not exempt under Rule 12.5(a) or (f); the remainder of the documents are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(f) or are not responsive.
16-005s 12/06/2016 The special panel is without authority to consider a motion to rehear or an appeal of a Rule 12 decision.  The panel emphasizes that any record connected to a case that is or has been before a court is exempt from Rule 12.
16-005 04/04/2016 Records related to the maintenance of a list of attorneys who are eligible for appointment under a county's Fair Defense Act plan are related to a judge's adjudicative function and are not subject to Rule 12. 
16-004 03/16/2016 Respondent does not have any responsive records.
16-003 03/16/2016 Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
16-002 03/17/2016 Records submitted for in camera review are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b) and (f).
16-001 03/17/2016 Reports created for a specific purpose not intended for public view but that include types of information that is available in publicly available reports must be released; records created on a stenographic recorder in the courtroom that also are judicial records subject to Rule 12, i.e., not related to the court's adjudicative function, are the records of the judge of the court in which the machine was used.
15-018 02/18/2016 While personnel records are administrative records of an agency that do not pertain to its adjudicative function and therefore are subject to Rule 12, some of the requested records are related to applicants for employment and therefore are exempt under Rule 12.5(e); other of the requested records are related to a pending EEOC complaint and therefore are exempt under Rule 12.5(j).
15-017 01/22/2016 Records related to the cases filed in the county's district and civil courts and action taken by the grand jury are case records and they are not covered under Rule 12.
15-016 01/05/2016 Matters related to a court's adjudicative function are not subject to Rule 12; some of the records submitted for review were not created, produced or filed in connection with a case, are not judicial work products and drafts, and do not pertain to internal deliberations on court or judicial administration matters and should be released. 
15-015 11/30/2015 A record that contains exempt information is not exempt in its entirety and the proper response is to redact exempt information prior to release: Requested video recordings that contain footage of non-public areas of a building should be redacted and the remainder of the recording released, unless the remaining portions of the video are determined to be exempt by the Special Committee under Rule 12.5(b).
15-014s 10/21/2015 Special Committee asks Respondent to refer Petitioner to additional possible custodian of requested records that Special Committee learned of after initial decision was issued.
15-014 10/13/2015 Under Rule 12, a Respondent is not required to create records responsive to an information request nor is it required to refer an information request to an entity that is not subject to Rule 12.
15-013 10/28/2015 A records custodian is not required to create a record to respond to Petitioner's request.
15-012 10/26/2015 Vouchers submitted for payment by court-appointed attorneys are records that are created, produced and filed in connection with matters that are or have been before a court and therefore are not "judicial records" that are subject to Rule 12. 
15-011 10/13/2015 Texas Center for the Judiciary, a non-profit corporation, is not a judicial agency subject to Rule 12.
15-010 10/07/2015 Requested records related to the administration of a court's grand jury; therefore, they are part of a court's adjudicative function and are not subject to Rule 12.
15-009 09/29/2015 Records maintained by the Judicial Branch Certification Commission related to the investigation and resolution of complaints filed with the Commission are not judicial records subject to Rule 12.
15-008 09/07/2015 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
15-007 07/06/2015 Communication requesting the review of court appointment vouchers relates to the investigation of a person's conduct and is exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
15-006 07/06/2015 Records that are created, produced and filed in connection with matters that are or have been before a court are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
15-005 07/06/2015 Respondent had already provided Petitioner all existing documents responsive to Petitioner's request. Also, a records custodian is not required to create a record to respond to Petitioner's request. 
15-004 07/02/2015 Records regarding the cost of a transcript in a specific case are created in connection with a case or matter that has been before a court are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
15-003 05/12/2015 Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
15-002 05/12/2015 Records related to cases involving parents and non-juvenile defendants in truancy cases filed with the court pertain to a court’s adjudicative function and are not “judicial records”’; records created by the courts for the purpose of reporting aggregate statistical information to OCA are subject to Rule 12 and are not exempt from disclosure.
15-001 03/19/2015 Two of the three records submitted for in camera review are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b) and (f); the third record is not exempt from disclosure.
14-005 12/16/2014 Docket sheets are case records that are not subject to Rule 12.
14-004 10/10/2014 Audio recording required to be produced at a hearing in response to a subpoena duces tecum is not a “judicial record” subject to Rule 12.
14-003 07/23/2014 Records pertain to the court’s adjudicative function and therefore are not subject to Rule 12; additionally, records pertain to the court’s internal deliberations on court or judicial administration matters and therefore would be exempt under Rule 12.5(f).
13-010 01/07/2014 Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
13-008 12/19/2013 The release of records relating to the investigation of a person’s character or conduct, unless requested by the person under investigation and barring impairment of the investigation, is exempted by Rule 12.5(k). Accordingly, the appeal is denied.
13-006,
13-007
10/22/2013 There being no records responsive to the requests, the appeal is denied; Petitioner’s requests fail to reasonably identify the requested records; Petitioner’s requests are for information that is not judicial records under Rule 12; Petitioner’s requests are for information that is personal and family information and is not subject to Rule 12; requested records have been addressed in prior Rule 12 appeals submitted by Petitioner; a judge who receives a request for records not in his custody must forward the request to the proper records custodian and notify the Petitioner in writing.
13-005 10/09/2013 Copies of documents related to Petitioner’s involvement in a crime he had reported to a police detective pertain to the court’s adjudicative function; therefore, they are not judicial records and are not subject to Rule 12.
13-004 09/10/2013 Traffic citation data related to a municipal court’s case records pertain to the municipal court’s adjudicative function; therefore, they are not judicial records and they are not subject to Rule 12.
13-003 10/03/2013 There being no records responsive to the request, the appeal is denied
13-002 09/27/2013 The recording of a video teleconference hearing held in a district court pertains to the court’s adjudicative function; therefore, it is not judicial records and is not subject to Rule 12.
13-001 08/20/2013 Citations and dispositions related to a municipal court’s case records pertain to the municipal court’s adjudicative function; therefore, they are not judicial records and are not subject to Rule 12.
12-014 12/21/2012 Requested records have been addressed in prior Rule 12 appeals submitted by Petitioner, all of which were untimely filed or failed to reasonably identify the requested records, and will not be addressed again; records that document vacation leave pertain to a court's administrative function and are judicial records; a judge who receives a request for records not in his custody must forward the request to the proper records custodian and notify the Petitioner in writing.
12-012 11/12/2012 Records that verify the race and ethnicity of random felony cases filed by a DA's office during a certain time period comprise part of the report used by a court to determine whether an accused will comply with the conditions of a personal bond; as such, the records are created in connection with criminal matters before the courts and are not judicial records subject to Rule 12.
12-011 10/10/2012 Petitioner’s request fails to reasonably identify the requested records.
12-010 09/28/2012 A judicial officer who receives a request for records not in the judicial officer’s custody, but in the custody of a records custodian known to the judge, must forward the request to the proper records custodian.
12-009 09/17/2012 The appeal of one of the denied requests was untimely; another request failed to identify the requested records. Records regarding a judge’s financial investments, side business, retirement account, political campaign donations and election costs are not maintained by or for a court or judicial agency in its regular course of business.
12-008 09/17/2012 The appeal of one of the denied requests was untimely; the other request failed to reasonably identify the requested records.
12-007 10/15/2012 The requests seek an explanation regarding certain events and documents related to a case filed with the Court and, to the extent that any records are responsive, they are case records that are not covered under Rule 12.
12-006 10/01/2012 Records related to Petitioner’s complaint and orders or judgments regarding a city ordinance pertain to the court’s adjudicative function and therefore are not subject to Rule 12; the primary significance of a decision finding that a records is not subject to Rule 12 is that Rule 12 procedures for responding to requests and appealing the denial of a request do not apply; neither the fact that a record is not subject to Rule 12 nor a decision making this determination should be used as a basis for withholding records
12-004 08/28/2012 Records regarding the creation and implementation of and necessity for an Alcohol Concentration Stipulation and Verification form are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(f).
12-003 08/09/2012 Information contained in a completed juror questionnaire is confidential by state statute and is, therefore, exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(i).
12-001 05/30/2012 Audio recordings of a specific court hearing are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
11-017 02/29/2012 Personal cellular phone bills do not have to be released to the public in order to prove that they are not paid for with public funds; the release of information that reveals personal, non-business related appointments or events, constitutes an invasion of personal privacy; statements about leave or documentation about appointments or events that are in the judge's regular course of business do not constitute an invasion of personal privacy and these records are not exempt under Rule 12.5(h) unless they reflect appointments or engagements that are in the future; the release of basic leave information or a notation that a person is "out," without additional details, does not constitute an invasion of personal privacy and these records are subject to disclosure.
11-016 02/16/2012 The disclosure of calendar entries indicating a judge's personal, non-business related appointments and events constitutes an invasion of personal privacy and is exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(h); however, the release of calendar entries indicating that a judge or his employees are "out" or on "vacation" without additional details does not constitute an invasion of personal privacy and this information is not exempt from disclosure unless it is for a future appointment. The release of notes regarding appointments related to a judge's or court's regular course of business, such as appointments that reflect meetings with other judges, does not constitute an invasion of personal privacy and this information is not exempt from disclosure. Respondent did not knowingly fail to comply with Rule 12; therefore, sanctions under Rule 12.10 would not be appropriate.
11-015 01/17/2012 Appeal was not timely because Respondent had previously denied a request submitted by Petitioner for similar information, and Petitioner did not appeal that denial; records related to the subject of a pending Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(j).
11-014 01/18/2012 Appeal was not timely because Respondent had previously denied a request submitted by Petitioner for similar information, and Petitioner did not appeal that denial; records related to the subject of a pending Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(j).
11-013 01/06/2012 Court recorders logs and records associated with events shown on the Register of Actions for a specific case pending in a court are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
11-012 11/01/2011 Requested records are not judicial records under Rule 12 because they are maintained by the State Bar of Texas, a judicial agency whose records are expressly made subject to Chapter 552 of the Government Code; Respondent not required to comply with the provisions of Rule 12.6(f) because the requested records are not judicial records subject to Rule 12.
11-011 11/01/2011 Records related to persons who have requested or been ordered to take a driver's safety course are case records, not judicial records as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
11-010 09/13/2011 A communication from a judge regarding the submission to a district clerk's office of a document that purports to be an application for writ of habeus corpus is a case record, not a judicial record, and therefore the record is not covered under Rule 12.
11-009 08/23/2011 Request that was delivered to the court coordinator, who then forwarded it to the judge of the court -- the actual records custodian -- should be treated as a Rule 12 request; bills for cellular phone service used by court staff and paid for, in whole or in part, with public funds are judicial records subject to Rule 12; information on a phone bill that reflects a person's home or personal telephone number or family members' names is exempt from disclosure; calendars that are made for the purpose of assisting the court in scheduling court hearings and other office duties are judicial records under Rule 12 and are available to the public subject to Rule 12.5 exemptions; a record that contains exempt information is not exempt in its entirety and the proper response is to redact exempt information prior to release; records that discuss a judge's personal appointments or where a judge or his staff vacation are not judicial records that are subject to Rule 12.
11-008 08/08/2011 Estimated rate for labor costs is not unreasonable and estimated time to compile records and complete request may be reasonable depending on the number of responsive records and the operations of the court.
11-007 07/25/2011 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
11-005 06/13/2011 Criminal history reports submitted to the PSRB as part of the application process are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(i) and Rule 12.5(k).
11-004 05/19/2011 Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
11-001 03/08/2011 Rule 12 does not apply to the State Bar of Texas, a judicial agency whose records are expressly made subject to the Public Information Act.
10-017 02/03/2011 The requested records relate to a case filed in Respondent's court. Thus, they are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
10-016 12/28/2010 Records related to a specific court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
10-015 10/25/2010 A receipt for court costs and fees associated with a case filed in justice court is a case record and is not subject to Rule 12.
10-014 10/06/2010 Records related to the security measures taken at a PSRB meeting containing information that, if released, would jeopardize the security of an individual against physical harm, and information and discussions regarding security procedures and plans of the PSRB are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b).
10-013 09/28/2010 Members of the Process Server Review Board are volunteers and their applications for membership on the PSRB are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(e).
10-012 09/28/2010 Records related to a complaint filed with the Process Server Review Board are not judicial records as defined by Rule 12.
10-011 07/20/2010 Docket sheets are case records that are not subject to Rule 12; judicial calendar is a judicial record; calendar entries that are exempt under Rule 12.5(h) or other Rule 12 exemptions should be redacted prior to release.
10-010 07/19/2010 Ticket associated with a case filed in justice court is a case record and is not subject to Rule 12.
10-009 06/24/2010 Respondent made a good faith effort to reply to request for records but was unsuccessful due to a technical email malfunction; records related to a case are not "judicial records" as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
10-008 06/04/2010 Performance evaluations are not exempt from disclosure, but information in the evaluations that mentions family members of a judge or complaints filed with the Judicial Conduct Commission may be withheld under Rule 12.5(d) and Rule 12.5(i).
10-007 05/18/2010 Respondent made a good faith effort to reply to request for records but was unsuccessful due to a technical email malfunction; records related to a case are not "judicial records" as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
10-006 04/20/2010 A police department is not a judicial agency with in the meaning of Rule 12.
10-004 04/26/2010 District clerk's office is a judicial agency covered by Rule 12; district clerk's escrow and minor account bank statements are case records and Rule 12 does not apply to them.
10-003 03/03/2010 A records custodian is not required to create a record, other than to print information stored in a computer.
10-002 04/05/2010 Requested records are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(a), (d), (f), (h), and (i) of the Rules of Judicial Administration; a record containing both exempt and non-exempt information should be redacted, not withheld in its entirety; Gov't Code Sec. 552.262 providing for an extension of time for providing documents from the date a deposit or bond is made does not apply to requests that are covered by Rule 12; Rule 12.10 sanctions can only be issued against a records custodian.
10-001 03/22/2010 Records related to the investigation and resolution of a complaint by a judicial agency pertain to the agency's adjudicative function and thus are not judicial records as defined by Rule 12.
09-006 01/15/2010 Internal administration rules related to how a court processes cases for disposition and regulating the method by which cases pending in a court are decided pertain to the court's adjudicative function and are not "judicial records"; case routing slips not "judicial records."
09-005 12/15/2009 Record created by a judge in his individual capacity and not maintained by his court in its regular course of business is not a "judicial record."
09-004 09/08/2009 Costs assessed by a district clerk for copies of case records are not subject to review under Rule 12 because case records are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
09-002 03/13/2009 Records requested of the Process Server Review Board are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5 (j) because the records are directly related to a lawsuit filed by requester against the Board.
09-001 03/17/2009 Rule12.3(a)(4) is not an exception to disclosure; requests for records do not have to state that they are being made pursuant to Rule 12 to be valid; leave records are not exempt as an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or as confidential under other law.
08-009 02/27/2009 Denials of requests for records should be made in writing and inform of the right to appeal; records regarding the deliberation of the qualifications an applicant's eligibility on a court appointment list are exempt under Rule 12.5(f); a signed order is not exempt from disclosure.
08-007 02/13/2009 Complaint files of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct are exempt from disclosure.
08-006 02/02/2009 Correspondence between county attorney and county court at law judges is attorney-client privileged and is not subject to Rule 12; information related to the investigation of a person’s character or conduct is exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
08-005 10/13/2008 An appellate court justice’s request to the court’s chief justice for judicial records of the court is not a request for public access and not subject to Rule 12.
08-004 10/27/2008 Personnel records not exempt as unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or as confidential under other law; one document not exempt and one document exempt as related to investigation of character or conduct; judicial officer who is not custodian must forward request to the proper custodian and may not merely instruct requester to ask proper custodian for records.
08-003 08/29/2008 Document properly withheld because it did not contain the information requested.
08-002 09/02/2008 Judicial records that relate to the administrative processes of a municipal court should be disclosed.
08-001 07/10/2008 Appeal that was filed incorrectly and untimely is dismissed.
07-006 11/09/2007 Records related to an investigation of a person’s character or conduct that became part of the record in a public hearing no longer are exempt and must be disclosed.
07-005 07/14/2007 Records of financial disclosures, licensing, continuing education, and other credentials of elected judges are judicial records that must be disclosed.
07-004 07/13/2007 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records" and contents of file are exempt from disclosure.
07-003 06/01/2007 The identity or source of a letter that instigates an investigation by the Process Server Review Board is exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
07-002 05/03/2007 Records of internal deliberations of the Process Server Review Board on matters of judicial administration are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(f).
07-001 02/09/2007 Statements of the reason for denial of certification by judicial board are exempt from disclosure as records relating to an investigation of the applicant's character or conduct.
06-004 11/14/2006 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records" and contents of file are exempt from disclosure.
06-003 10/13/2006 Cost assessment for copies proper under Rule 12.7 and Texas Administrative Code.
06-001 04/07/2006 Reports of ad litem fees paid to attorneys are not exempt and must be disclosed; individual report prepared at request of judge who anticipated being a party to litigation was exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.
05-005 02/13/2006 E-mails between juvenile board judges and board's contract attorney that are made or maintained in the regular course of business but do not pertain to their adjudicative function are judicial records subject to disclosure.
05-004 02/10/2006 Reports to governmental agencies about convictions in designated cases pertain to a court's adjudicative function and are not judicial records, but documents related to general procedures are judicial records and must be disclosed.
05-003 01/05/2006 Draft reports analyzing probation revocations of Harris County district courts are not judicial records and are exempt as judicial work product and as internal deliberations on judicial administration matters.
05-001 03/07/2005 Texas Center for the Judiciary, a non-profit corporation, is not a judicial agency subject to Rule 12.
04-004 09/21/2004 Contents of Judicial Conduct Commission investigative files exempt from disclosure.
04-003 09/17/2004 Records related to expunction of attorney disciplinary records were matters before the Supreme Court and thus not "judicial records."
04-002 09/01/2004 Contents of Judicial Conduct Commission complaints files exempt from disclosure.
03-008 01/23/2004 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
03-006 10/21/2003 Custodians of judicial records provided required access.
03-005 10/16/2003 Docket sheets of a municipal court are not judicial records.
03-004 08/18/2003 Records related to municipal court cases are not judicial records.
03-003 08/18/2003 Misdemeanor convictions are not judicial records.
03-002s 08/18/2003 Portions of complaints that reflect confidential information should be withheld.
03-002 07/16/2003 Copies of complaints filed against a municipal judge are open.
03-001 04/24/2003 Access to inquest records governed by statutory law, not Rule 12.
02-005 12/23/2002 Traffic citations not "judicial records."
02-004 11/06/2002 Oaths of office and anti-bribery statements not in judge's custody.
02-003 06/28/2002 Records of administrative judge "intended to instruct, assist or guide judges in the exercise of their contempt power" are "judicial records".
02-002 06/17/2002 Traffic citation records not "judicial records."
02-001 06/07/2002 Judge who did not have records relating to investigation and consultation should have attempted to determine custodian and notified requestor.
01-005 11/02/2001 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
01-003 06/22/2001 Trial record in court of appeals not "judicial records."
01-002 07/19/2001 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
01-001 05/31/2001 Appeal not timely from denial of access to judicial records of county community supervision and corrections department.
00-007 12/19/2000 Court's denial of a fee waiver did not include the required language about reasons for denial, the right to appeal, and the OCA director's name and address.
00-006 10/25/2000 Visiting judge records were "judicial records;" judge did not refer request to proper custodian.
00-005 10/23/2000 Records of associate judge retention committee were "judicial records," but were exempt from disclosure.
00-003 04/27/2000 Names of individuals on community supervision/probation in eight counties are not "judicial records."
00-002 04/10/2000 Records custodian not required to respond to request from prisoner.
00-001 02/07/2000 Traffic citation records not "judicial records."
99-002 01/14/2000 "Judicial records" of unauthorized practice of law committee were exempt from disclosure.
99-001 08/31/1999 "Judicial records" of unauthorized practice of law committee were exempt from disclosure.