11-21-14 west v. liquor control board

8/10/2019 11-21-14 West v. Liquor Control Board

1/19

1

I N T HE S UP ER IO R C OU RT O F T HE S TA TE O F W AS HI NG TO N

I N A ND F OR T HE C OU NT Y O F T HU RS TO N

ARTHUR WEST,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WASHINGTON STATE LIQUORC ON TR OL B OA RD , e t a l. ,

Defendant.

)))))))))))

No. 13-2-02227-3

__ ___ ___ _________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ____________ ___ ___ ___ _________

O RA L O PI NI ON O F T HE C OU RT

B E I T R EM EM BE RE D t ha t o n t he 2 1s t d ay o f N ov em be r,

2 01 4, t he a bo ve -e nt it le d a n d n um be re d c au se c am e o n f or

hearing before the Honorable Christine M. Schaller,

Judge, Thurston County Superior Court, Olympia,

Washington.

K at hr yn A . B ee hl er , C CR N o. 2 44 8Certified Realtime Reporter

Thurston County Superior Court2 00 0 L ak er i dg e D ri ve S .W .

B ui ld in g 2 , R oo m 1 09O ly mp ia , WA 9 85 02

(360) 754-4370


2/19

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

A P P E A R A N C E S

For the Plaintiff: A r th u r W e stP ro S e1 20 S ta te A ve nu e N ESuite 1497Ol ym pi a, W A 9 85 [email protected]

For the Defendant: B ru ce L . T ur co ttAssistant Attorney GeneralO ff ic e o f t he A tt or ne y G en er al1125 Washington StreetLicensing & Administrative

Law DivisionP . O. B ox 4 01 10O ly mp ia , W A 9 85 04 -0 11 0

[email protected]


3/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

3

November 21, 2014, Olympia, Washington

MORNING SESSION

The Honorable Judge Christine M. Schaller, Presiding

Kathryn A. Beehler, Official Reporter

--o0o--

TH E C O UR T: N um ber 9 , W e st v er su s t h e

W as hi ng to n S ta te L iq uo r C on tr ol B oa rd , e t a l. T hi s

m at te r c om es b ef or e t he c ou rt f or a r ul in g.

M r. T ur co tt i s p re se nt o n b eh al f o f - -

MR . TU RC OT T: Y es .

T HE C OU RT : - - t he d ef en da nt s, a nd M r. W es t i s

p re se nt r ep re se nt in g h im se lf i n t hi s m at t er a s

p la in ti ff . I p re vi ou sl y m ad e a r ul in g o n a ll i ss ue s

r el at ed t o t hi s P ub li c R ec or ds A ct c as e b ac k o n

Ju ly 1 1, 2 01 4. A t t h e c o nc lu si on o f t h e c a se a nd t he

c on cl us io n o f m y r ul in g, I i nv it ed a dd it io na l

b ri ef in g s ol el y o n t h e i ss ue o f a tt or ne y- cl ie nt

p ri vi le ge a nd t he i ss ue o f w a iv er . A nd o th er t ha n

t ha t s pe ci fi c a mo un t o f d oc um en ts t ha t w er e p ro vi de d

t o M r. W es t b y w ay o f t hi s p ub li c r ec or ds r eq ue st a nd

t he se d oc um en ts w hi ch a re r ed ac te d, I h av e r ul ed a s

i t r el at es t o e ve ry o th er p or ti on o f n ot o nl y t he

J ul y 3 , 2 01 3, P RA r eq ue st , b ut t he re w as a ls o a n

O ct ob er p ub li c r ec or ds r eq ue st , a nd m y f ul l r ul in g i s

p ar t o f t he r ec or d f ro m t he J ul y 1 1 h ea ri ng .


4/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

4

T he d ef en da nt s f il ed a b ri ef a nd a dd it io na l

e vi de nc e a ft er t he J ul y 1 1, 2 01 4, h ea ri ng . M r. W es t

d id n ot f il e a dd it io na l b ri ef in g; h ow ev er , h e f il ed a

c op y o f t he r ed ac te d r ec or ds t ha t h e h ad b ee n

p ro vi de d. A nd t hi s i s s pe ci fi ca ll y r el at ed t o a

p ub li c r ec or ds r eq ue st t ha t M r. W es t m ad e o n J ul y 3 ,

2 01 3, f or t he I -5 0 2 r ul e- ma ki ng f il e.

R CW 4 2. 56 .2 10 (3 ) i nd ic at es t ha t a n a ge nc y i s

r eq ui re d t o s pe ci fy w he n t he y r ed ac t r ec or ds w ha t

e xe mp ti on a pp li es , a n d t he y a re r eq ui re d t o i nc lu de a

statement of the specific exemption authorizing the

w it hh ol di ng o f t he r ec or d o r p ar t o f t he r ec or d a nd a

b ri ef e xp la na ti on o f h ow t he e xe mp ti on a pp li es t o t he

re co rd . A nd i n t hi s c as e, t o b e c lea r, n o d oc um en ts

w er e w it hh el d e nt ir el y, b ut s om e o f t he d oc um en ts

w er e r ed ac te d b as ed u po n a n a ss er ti on o f a n

attorney-client privilege.

R CW 3 4. 05 .3 70 i s t he s ta tu te r eg ar di ng t he

r ul e- ma ki ng f il e. A nd i t r eq ui re s t ha t a r ul e- ma ki ng

f il e s ha ll b e m ai nt ai ne d f or e ac h p ro po se d r ul e f or

p ub li ca ti on i n t he s ta te r eg is te r. T he f il e a nd

materials incorporated by reference shall be

a va il ab le f or p ub li c i ns pe ct io n. T ha t' s w ha t ( 1) o f

th e s ta tut e r eq ui re s. S o i t i s c le ar th at t he

r ul e- ma ki ng f il e i s a p ub li c f il e, b ec au se i t s ha ll


5/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

5

be available for public inspection.

S ub se ct io n ( 2) o f t he s ta tu te i nd ic at es t ha t t he

a ge nc y r ul e- ma ki ng f il e s ha ll c on ta in a ll o f t he

f ol lo wi ng . A nd l et te rs ( a) t hr ou gh ( g) i nd ic at e a ll

d oc um en ts t ha t a re r eq ui re d t o b e c on ta in ed i n a ny

ru le -m ak ing f il e. I am n ot g oi ng t o s ta te t ho se a t

t hi s t im e, b ec au se t ho se s pe ci fi c c ri te ri a a re n ot

p ar t o f t he i ss ue b ef or e t he c ou rt . B ut s ub se ct io n

( h) i nd ic at es t ha t i n a dd it io n t o a ll t he r ec or ds

t ha t a re r eq ui re d, t h e a ge nc y r ul e- m ak in g f il e s ha ll

a ls o c on ta in a ny o th er m at er ia l p la ce d i n t he f il e b y

the agency.

S ub se ct io n ( 3) o f t hi s s ta tu te i nd ic at es ,

"Internal agency documents are exempt from

i nc lu si on i n t h e r ul e -m ak in g f il e u nd er s ub se ct io n

( 2) o f t hi s s ec ti on t o t he e xt en t t he y c on st it ut e

preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, and

intra-agency memoranda in which opinions are

expressed or policies formulated or recommended,

e xc ep t t ha t a s pe ci fi c d oc um en t i s n ot e xe mp t f ro m

i nc lu si on w he n i t i s p ub li cl y c it ed b y a n a ge nc y i n

connection with its decision."

I r ea d t hi s o n t he p la in l an gu ag e t ha t a n a ge nc y

d oe s n ot h av e t o i nc lu de , k ee p i n t he ir r ul e- ma ki ng

f il e a ny o f t he d oc um en ts t ha t a re s et f or th u nd er


6/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

6

s ub se ct io n ( 3) , b ec au se t he y a re c le ar ly e xe mp t,

a ga in , u nl es s t he re 's a d oc um en t t ha t i s r ef er en ce d

i n c on ne ct io n w it h t h e u lt im at e d ec is io n m ad e b y t he

agency.

T he d ef en da nt s h av e a ck no wl ed ge d i n t hi s m at te r

t ha t t he se d oc um en ts , w hi ch a re c le ar ly

attorney-client privilege documents I don't think

t he re 's a ny q ue st io n a bo ut t ha t w er e p la ce d i n t he

r ul e- ma ki ng f il e. A nd t he S ta te h as t ri ed t o a rg ue

t ha t t he re i s s om eh ow a d if fe re nc e b et we en t he

w or ki ng v er si on o f t he f il e a nd t he f in al v er si on o f

th e f i le . B ut as I r ea d t h e s t at ut e, i t d oe sn 't

r ea ll y m a k e a d is ti nc ti on . C le ar ly t he f in al v er si on

is w ha t c om es t o t he co ur t i f t he c ou rt h as t o m ak e a

d ec is io n a s t o r ul es t ha t a re p ro mu lg at ed . B ut

c er ta in ly t he s ta tu te s a re n' t s ep ar at e a s i t r el at es

t o w ha t a w or ki ng f il e i s v er su s t he f in al

rule-making file.

T he a ge nc y h as a rg ue d t ha t e it he r, f ir st , t he

d oc um en ts a re e xe mp t f ro m i nc lu si on a nd a r e n ot

r eq ui re d t o b e d is cl os ed u nd er R CW 3 4. 0 5. 37 0( 3) ,

b ec au se t he se w er e i nt er na l a ge nc y d oc um en ts a nd

t he re fo re s ho ul d a r e e xe mp te d. A nd I a gr ee t ha t h ad

t he y n ot b ee n p la ce d i n t he p ub li c f il e, t ha t t he se

w ou ld h av e b ee n d oc um en ts t ha t w er e n ot r eq ui re d t o


7/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

7

b e i n t he r ul e- ma ki ng f il e a nd t he re w ou ld b e n o

r ea so n t o d is cl os e t he m o r k ee p t he m i n t he

rule-making file, because they weren't required under

th e l a w. Th ey a re c er ta in ly n ot o ne o f t h e b e s ev en

s pe ci fi c i te ms t ha t h av e t o b e i n t he r ul e- ma ki ng

f il e a s s et f or th i n s ub se ct io n ( 2) o f R CW 3 4. 05 .3 70 .

T he s ec on d a rg um en t t ha t t he S ta te m ak es i s t ha t

i f t he c ou rt w er e t o f in d t ha t t he y h ad b ee n p la ce d

i n t he r ul e- ma ki ng f il e, a nd i f t ha t c ou ld s om eh ow

m ak e t he m a p ub li c d oc um en t, t ha t i t w as a n

inadvertent disclosure of the attorney-client

pr iv il eg e. A nd b ef or e I g o o n wi th my r uli ng , I w an t

t o i nd ic at e t ha t c er ta in ly , a s a l aw ye r, t hi s c ou rt

understands the importance of the attorney-client

p ri vi le ge , w hy i t i s s uc h a n i mp or ta nt p ri vi le ge , w hy

i t i s p ro te ct ed , a nd w hy a l ot o f m at er ia ls c an no t b e

d is cl os ed a nd a re n ot d is cl os ed d ur in g t he c ou rs e o f

litigation, under public records requests, and the

like, because that information between the attorney

a nd t he c li en t s ho ul d r em ai n c on fi de nt ia l, a s l on g a s

th ey k ee p i t c on fi de nt ia l. A nd s o a s I g o t h ro ug h m y

r ul in g, I t hi nk t ha t a ll l aw ye rs a nd t he c ou rt k ee p

t ha t i n t he f ro nt o f t he ir m in d b ec au se o f t he

i mp or ta nc e o f t ha t p ri vi le ge . B ut t he p ri vi le ge i s

n ot a bs ol ut e, a s e ve ry on e k no ws , a s w el l.


8/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

8

E xe mp ti on s f ro m d is cl os ur e p ur su an t t o t he P R A a re

to b e n ar ro wl y c on st ru ed . I f a s ta tut e d oe s no t

c on fl ic t w it h t he P RA , t he c ou rt s ho ul d t re at i t a s

s up pl em en ti ng t he P RA . S o t hi s w as a p ub li c r ec or ds

r eq ue st f or t he I -5 02 f il e. H ow ev er , M r. W es t d id n' t

ha ve t o m ak e a p ub li c r ec or ds r eq ue st. H e c ou ld h av e

s im pl y g on e t o t he a ge nc y a nd r eq ue st ed t o r ev ie w t he

r ul e- ma ki ng f il e, b ec au se i t i s t o b e o pe n t o p ub li c

i ns pe ct io n u nd er t he c le ar t er ms o f R CW 3 4 .0 5 .3 70 .

So in t hi s c as e I am l oo kin g a t b ot h o f t he se

s ta tu te s t og et he r, a lt ho ug h t hi s i s a P RA r eq ue st ,

a nd I d on 't f in d t ha t t he se s ta tu te s c on fl ic t w it h

on e a no the r f or t he p ur po se s o f m y r ul in g to da y. A nd

I f in d t hat R CW 3 4.0 5.3 70 i s a st at ut e t ha t c an b e

r ea d i n c on j un ct io n w it h t he P RA .

I n e na ct in g t he 1 98 8 A PA , t he L eg is la tu re i nt en de d

to provide greater public access to administrative

d ec is io n m a k in g. T he p ur po se o f r u l e- ma ki ng

p ro ce du re s i s t o e ns ur e t ha t m em be rs o f t he p ub li c

can participate meaningfully in the development of

a ge nc y p ol ic ie s w h ic h a ff ec t t he m. I h av e, o f

c ou rs e, r ev ie we d a ll o f t he c as e l aw t ha t h as b ee n

ci te d i n t he b ri ef in g. O ne o f t h e c a se s t ha t w a s

cited was Z in k v. T he C it y o f M es a, 1 62 W n. A pp . 6 88 .

Th at 's a 2 01 1 c a se . An d i t t al ks a bo ut t he i ss ue o f


9/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

9

the attorney-client privilege.

B ef or e I g et t o t ha t, c er ta in ly t he a ge nc y, a s

I 'v e i nd ic at ed , h a s t o m ak e a va il ab le t he p ub li c

r ec or ds t ha t a r e r eq ue st ed t o b e r ev ie we d. A nd t he y

d o n ot h av e t o m ak e a va il ab le , a s I 'v e i nd ic at ed

previously, the attorney-client privilege records.

A nd t he y c an s e t f o rt h t ha t e xe mp ti on .

Z in k v . T he C it y o f Me sa i s a c as e w he re t he re

w er e t wo d if fe re nt t yp es o f d oc um en ts t ha t w er e

a tt or ne y- cl ie nt p ri vi le ge t ha t w er e d is cl os ed . S om e

o f t he r ec or ds w er e d is cl os ed d ur in g t he c ou rs e o f

l it ig at io n, a nd t h e c ou rt t al ke d a bo ut t ho se r ec or ds .

There were another set of attorney-client privilege

r ec or ds w hi ch I b el ie ve h ad b ee n r ev ie we d i n c am er a

b y t he j ud ge , a nd t ho se g ot d is cl os ed t o t he o th er

s id e b y t he c le rk .

S o t he c ou rt s pe ci fi ca ll y f ou nd i n t ha t c as e t ha t

t ha t w as a n i na dv er te nt d is cl os ur e o f t ho se r ec or ds

that could not waive the attorney-client privilege,

b ec au se y ou h ad t hi s t hi rd -p ar ty c le rk w ho s en t a

c op y o f t he se d oc um en ts a nd I d id n' t w ri te t hi s

do wn , b ut I b el ie ve i t w as o n a pp ea l to th e o th er

si de . A nd t he c ou rt s ai d, n o, th at is n ot g oi ng t o

w ai ve t he p ri vi le ge . T ha t w a s a m is ta ke .

A s I i nd ic at ed , t he i ss ue i n t hi s c as e b ef or e t hi s


10/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

10

c ou rt i s n ot w he th er o r n ot t he r ed ac te d d oc um en ts

w er e a tt or ne y- c li en t p ri vi le ge d oc um en ts . T he i ss ue

i s w he th er o r n ot t he c li en t, w ho i s t he d ef en da nt i n

this matter, revealed the attorney-client privileged

i nf or ma ti on t o a t h ir d p ar ty a nd t he re fo re f ai le d t o

k ee p t he i nf or ma ti on c on fi de nt ia l. T ha t i s t he w ho le

i ss ue b ef or e t hi s c ou rt , i f d ef en da nt s f ai le d t o k ee p

their privileged information confidential. Because

w he n a c li en t r ev ea ls i nf or ma ti on t o a t hi rd p ar ty ,

t he a tt or ne y- cl i en t p ri vi le ge i s w ai ve d u nl es s t he

t hi rd p ar ty i s n ec es sa ry f or t he c om mu ni ca ti on o r h as

r et ai ne d t he a tt or ne y f or a c om mo n i nt er es t. I t hi nk

t he m os t w el l k no wn e xa mp le o f f ai li ng t o k ee p

i nf or ma ti on c on fi de nt ia l i s t he e xa mp le o f t he l aw ye r

an d a c li en t m ee ti ng in a p ub lic p lac e l ik e a

r es ta ur an t a nd d is cu ss in g t hi ng s a nd h av i ng t ha t

o ve rh ea rd b y a t hi rd p ar ty .

I n t he Mesa c as e, a s I 'v e b ee n d is cu ss in g , t h e

c ou rt d id f in d t ha t t ho se d oc um en ts t ha t w er e

d is cl os ed b y t h e c l er k w er e a n i na dv er te nt

d is cl os ur e, a nd t he y o rd er ed t ha t t h e p ri vi le ge w as

n ot w ai ve d. T he y a ls o o rd er ed , h ow ev er , t ha t t he

d is cl os ur e o f t he d oc um en ts d ur in g t he c ou rs e o f t he

l it ig at io n p ro ce ss d i d, i n f ac t, w ai ve t he

attorney-client privilege as to those documents only.


11/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

11

O th er c as es t ha t h av e b ee n c it ed w er e p ri or t o

2 01 1 a nd a re i ns tr uc ti ve . M os t o f t ho se c as es t al ke d

a bo ut t he w ai ve r o f a tt or ne y- cl ie nt p ri vi le ge i n t he

c on te xt o f d is co ve ry a nd l it ig at io n i n a c as e. A nd ,

ultimately, those cases were actually incorporated

i nt o E vi de nt ia ry R ul e 5 02 a nd t he t es t r eg ar di ng t he

waiver of attorney-client privilege that was

u lt im at el y a do pt ed i nt o E vi de nt ia ry R ul e 5 02 . T ha t

rule doesn't apply, because that rule specifically

t al ks a bo ut a pp ly in g o nl y t o l it ig at io n c as es o r

d is cl os ur e t o a W as hi ng to n o ff ic e o r a ge nc y. A nd

th is w as n ot a d is cl osu re m ad e t o a n a g en cy. T hi s i s

w he th er o r n ot a n a ge nc y d is cl os ed i nf or ma ti on .

T he r ul es c oo rd in at or , w ho i s t he o ne w ho w as

r es po ns ib le f or t h e I -5 02 f il e, i s o bv io us ly a v er y

i mp or ta nt t hi ng a s i t r el at es t o m y r ul in g i n t hi s

m at te r. R CW 3 4. 05 .3 12 i s t h e s ta tu te f or a r ul es

c oo rd in at or . A nd i t i n d ic at es t ha t e ac h a g e nc y s h a ll

d es ig na te a r ul e c oo rd in at or w ho s ha ll h av e k no wl ed ge

o f t he s ub je ct s o f r ul es b ei ng p ro po se d , m ai nt ai n t he

r ec or ds o f a ny s uc h a ct io n, r es po nd t o p ub li c

i nq ui ri es . A nd I 'm j us t r ea di ng p or ti on s o f t hi s

statute.

T he r ul es c oo rd in at or m ay b e a n e mp lo ye e o f

a no th er a ge nc y. T he s ta te h as a rg ue d t ha t t he ir


12/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

12

r ul es c oo rd in at or , w h o w as K ar en M cC al l, m ad e a n

inadvertent mistake by including these documents in

w ha t i s a p ub li c f il e, o pe n t o p ub li c i ns pe ct io n,

t ha t p er ha ps t he re w er e s om e t ra in in g i ss ue s r el at ed

t o h er u nd er st an di ng o f w ha t s ho ul d o r s ho ul d n ot g o

in to t he r ul e f ile . An d t he y h av e a lso a rg ue d t ha t

b ec au se a r ul es c oo rd in at or c an b e a n e mp lo ye e o f

a no th er a ge nc y , t h e c ou rt s ho ul d l oo k a t t ha t i ss ue

o n t he i ss ue o f i na dv er te nc e.

C le ar ly , t hi s s ta tu te s ay s y ou 'r e g oi ng t o h av e a

r ul es c oo rd in at or w ho i s g oi ng t o m ai nt ai n y ou r r ul e

fi le , a nd th ey n ee d t o k no w w ha t' s g oi ng o n. T he y

n ee d t o h av e k no wl ed ge o f w ha t t he s ub je ct i s a s i t

re la te s t o t he r ul e. T he y h av e t o m ai nt ai n t he

r ec or d, a nd t he y h av e t o b e p re pa re d t o r es po nd t o

p ub li c i n qu ir ie s. A nd s o o n e a ge nc y c a n d e ci de t o

h av e s om eo ne w ho d oe sn 't w or k f or t he ir a ge nc y b e

t he ir r ul e c oo rd in at or . B ut i f t he y m a ke t ha t

c ho ic e, c er ta in ly , t he y w ou ld h av e t o e ns ur e t ha t t he

r ul es c oo rd in at or h ad a ll o f t hi s k no wl ed g e a nd k ne w

h ow t o m ai nt ai n t he f il e.

I n t hi s c as e t he r ul es c oo rd in at or w as , i n f ac t,

w or ki ng f or t he L iq uo r C on tr ol B oa rd , a nd t ha t w as

K ar en M cC al l. H er s wo rn t es ti mo ny i nd ic at es t ha t a s

t o t he I -5 02 r ul e- ma ki ng f il e, s he w as i n c ha rg e o f


13/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

13

c ol le ct in g t he d oc um en ts . S he w as t he p er so n w ho

m ai nt ai ne d t he r ul e- ma ki ng f il e. A nd s he w as

essentially a record keeper.

T he I -5 02 r ul e- ma ki ng f il e c on si st ed o f s ev er al

thousand documents that filled two document boxes.

W he n c ol le ct in g d oc um en ts f or wa rd ed t o h er b y t he

b oa rd m em be rs o r a ge nc y s ta ff , t ha t i s w ha t s he p ut

i nt o t he r ul e- ma ki ng f il e. S he d id n' t c ho os e

d oc um en ts . D oc um en ts w er e s pe ci fi ca ll y s en t t o h er

a s t he r ul es c oo rd in at or f or p la ce me nt i n t he

rule-making file.

S he d id n ot c he ck f or d up li ca te s b ut p la ce d

e ve ry th in g i n t he f il e. S he d id n ot i nt en ti on al ly

place any attorney-client privilege documents into

w ha t s he q uo te d a s t he w or ki ng v er si on o f t he

r ul e- ma ki ng f il e. A nd a s I i nd ic at ed p re vi ou sl y, t he

s ta tu te s d o n ot d if fe re nt ia te a s i t r el at es t o w ha t

i s p ub li c i n a p ub li c f il e, w he th er i t i s t he w or ki ng

f il e o r t he f in al f il e.

S he t es ti fi ed t ha t i f t he re w as e ve r a ny d ou bt i n

m y m in d a s t o w he th er s om et hi ng b el on ge d i n t he f il e,

I w ou ld h av e s ch ed ul ed t im e t o a tt en d t he e xe cu ti ve

m an ag em en t t ea m m ee ti ng t o a ll ow t he b oa rd t o m ak e

t he f in al d et er mi na ti on . A nd a lt ho ug h I w as r ea ll y

un cl ea r a s t o wh y Mr . W es t f il ed a c opy o f t he


14/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

14

d oc um en ts t ha t w er e r ed ac te d, i t u lt im at el y h as

p ro vi de d m e a r el ev an t p ie ce o f i nf or ma ti on . B ec au se

she said this was inadvertent. It was a mistake. I

d id n' t k no w. I d id n' t k no w t ha t t he y w er e p ri vi le ge d

d oc um en ts o r I w ou ld h av e n ev er p ut t he m i n, a nd i f

I 'd h ad a q ue st io n a bo ut p ut ti ng t he se d oc um en ts i n a

p ub li c f il e a va il ab le f or p ub li c d is cl os ur e, I w ou ld

have asked.

T wo -t hi rd s o f t he se d oc um en ts o n t he b ot to m o f t he

page say in capital letters, "confidential

attorney-client privileged communication. Do not

di sc lo se ." T he re c an b e n o c on fus io n i n a ny on e' s

m in d w h at t he se d oc um en ts w er e. T he y w e re s en t t o

h er b y e it he r L iq uo r C on tr ol B oa rd m em be rs o r p eo pl e

wh o w o rk ed f or t he a ge nc y. T he y w e re se nt t o h e r a s

t he r ul es c oo rd in at or . H er s ol e j o b f o r t hi s f i le

w as t o c ol le ct a nd m ai nt ai n t he r ec or ds o f t he

a ct io ns , t o k ee p t he f il e, a nd r es po nd t o p ub li c

in qu ir ie s. A nd w ha t is p ar t o f t ha t f il e, u nd er t he

p la in l an gu ag e o f t he s ta tu te , i nc lu de s a n y o th er

m at er ia l p la ce d i n t he f il e b y t he a ge nc y.

T he a ge nc y i n t hi s c as e f ai le d t o k ee p t he ir

attorney-client documents confidential, because they

chose, not inadvertently; they purposefully chose to

p la ce t he se d oc um en ts i n t he p ub li c r ul e- ma ki ng f il e.


15/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15

An d a ga in , I a gr ee w it h t he S ta te . T he y w er en 't

r eq ui re d t o, b ec au se s ub se ct io n ( 3) o f R CW 3 4 .0 5. 37 0

s ai d, t ho se t yp e o f d oc um en ts , t he y d on 't g o i n t he

p ub li c r ul e- ma ki ng f i le . T he y a re e xe mp t. B ut t h e

State Liquor Control Board lost that attorney-client

p ri vi le ge w he n t he y f ai le d t o k ee p t ha t i nf or ma ti on

confidential by purposefully placing those materials

i n a p ub li c f il e a va il ab le f or p ub li c i ns pe ct io n.

So I f in d t ha t t her e w as a vi ol at io n o f t he P ub li c

R ec or ds A ct , b ec au se t ho se d oc um en ts w er e

inappropriately redacted when they were provided to

Mr. West. And so I would order that they be

disclosed to h im. An d I will take up the issue of

p en al ti es , w hi ch w il l h av e t o b e d on e a t a s ub se qu en t

h ea ri ng . A nd t he c ou rt w il l a t t ha t t i me c on si de r

th e Yousoufian factors.

I a ls o r ec og ni ze , o f c ou rs e, I h av e n o i de a w ha t

i s i n t he se r ec or ds , b ec au se I h av e o nl y s ee n

r ed ac te d v er si on s, a nd I d on 't e xp ec t t o s ee t he

o th er d oc um en ts . I r ec og ni ze t ha t t he S ta te m ay w an t

t o a pp ea l m y r ul in g i n t hi s c as e, a nd t he c ou rt w il l

ta ke u p i ss ue s as it r el at es t o t ha t a nd a r eq ue st

fo r a s ta y i f th e S ta te i s g oi ng to m ak e t ha t r eq ue st

a s i t r el at es t o t he d is cl os ur e o f d oc um en ts a t a

different hearing.


16/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

16

M R. T UR CO TT : A nd Y ou r H on or , I u nd er st an d

t hi s - - s o t hi s c as e h as b ee n c on so li da te d w it h a

ca se t ha t J ud ge P ri ce h as . A re y ou a wa re of th at ?

A nd t he C le rk 's O ff ic e, I t hi nk , f ai le d t o g et t ha t

or de r. A nd we w er e t ol d e ar li er t hi s we ek t ha t t he y

w er e w or ki ng o n i t, t ha t t he y w er e p ro ce ss in g i t, a nd

so --

MR . W EST: That's the - -

T HE C OU RT : H ol d o n j us t a m ome nt .

MR. WEST: Oh.

T HE C OU RT : T he p or ti on t ha t w as c on so li da te d

t o J ud ge P ri ce i s t he r ul e- ma ki ng c ha ll en g e - -

M R. T UR CO TT : C or re ct .

THE COURT : -- because his case i s a rule

m ak in g c h al le ng e. T he re i s a p or ti on o f t h is c as e

u nd ec id ed t ha t i s a r ul e- ma ki ng c ha ll en ge , a s w el l.

T he re w as a ls o p ub li c r ec or ds i ss ue s, a nd t ha t' s w ha t

I h av e d ec id ed i n t hi s c as e.

S o I r ec og ni ze t ha t J ud ge P ri ce w il l b e d ec id in g

t he r ul e- ma ki ng i ss ue s, w hi ch m ak es s en se , s in ce I 'm

n ot g oi ng t o b e h ea ri ng t hi s c as e a ny l on ge r b ec au se

I 'm c ha ng in g t o a d if fe re nt r ot at io n. A ct ua ll y, w he n

t he o th er c as e w as f il ed , t he re w as a r eq ue st t ha t I

he ar i t, a nd I s ai d n o, b ec au se I w as n' t g oi ng t o b e

he re a ny l on ge r. So ye s, I k no w t ha t.


17/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

17

MR . TURCOTT: Yeah. I understand that. I'm

j us t w on de ri ng a bo ut s ub se qu en t e nt ry o f a n o rd er a nd

a p os si bl e e nt ry o f a s ta y. A nd w oul d - - wo ul d y ou

b e a bl e t o h an dl e t ha t?

T HE C OU RT : W el l, c er ta in ly J ud ge P ri ce i sn 't

g oi ng t o d et er mi ne w he th er o r n ot m y r ul in g i s

st ay ed . Y ou w il l be a bl e t o s et h ea ri ng s in fr on t o f

me . I 'm g oi ng to be at F am il y a nd J uv en il e C o ur t.

M R. TU RC OT T: O ka y.

THE COURT: I'm not gone. I'm just going to a

d if fe re nt r ot at io n. A nd s o f o r t h e e n tr y o f t he

or de r a nd f or a s ta y an d t ho se i te ms , t ho se c an b e

no te d i n f ro nt of me . I w il l h a ve a m ot io n c al en da r

e ve ry o th er F ri da y a t F am il y a nd J uv en il e C ou rt .

MR . W ES T: T o t he e xt en t t he re 's an y

a mb ig ui ty , I d on 't h av e a ny o bj ec ti on t o t he se a re

m at te rs b ei ng s ev er ed f or t he c on ve ni en ce o f t he

S ta te i f t he y a re n' t c le ar ly a lr ea dy . I t hi nk t ha t

that's appropriate.

T HE C OU RT : W el l, I t hi nk th at t he p ub li c

r ec or ds i ss ue h av e n o w b ee n d ec id ed - -

MR . WEST: Okay.

T HE C OU RT : - - t he o nl y r em ain in g i ss ue i n

t hi s c as e i s t he r ul e- ma ki ng i ss ue , a nd t ha t i s, t o

m y u nd er st an di ng , w ha t t he i ss ue i n f ro nt o f


18/19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

18

J ud ge P ri ce i s.

M R. T UR CO TT : C or re ct .

MR . W E ST : V er y g o od , Y ou r H on or .

T HE C OU RT : T ha nk y ou .

MR . W E ST : I w il l c o nf er w it h c oun se l a n d g e t

a t ra ns cr ip t p ro du ce d a nd p re pa re a n o rd er n ex t w ee k.

Wo ul d t ha t w or k f or t he c ou rt ? T he w ee k a ft er ?

T HE C OU RT : A ga in , y ou' ll ha ve t o s et i t i n

f ro nt o f m e a t F am il y a nd J uv en il e C ou rt i f t he re 's

no t a g re em en t a s t o t h e t e rm s o f t he o rd er . An d y o u

c an c on ta ct M s. M oo re , w ho i s m y c ur re nt j ud ic ia l

a ss is ta nt , a nd s he w il l h el p i n t he c oo rd in at io n o f

g et ti ng m at te rs s et i n f ro nt o f m e a t t he o th er

courthouse.

MR . WEST: Thank you, Y our Honor. We'll do

o ur b es t t o a gr ee a nd s ch ed ul e a ny s ta y o r o th er

proceedings that are necessary.

MR . TURCOTT: Okay. Thank y ou .

T HE C OU RT : T ha nk y ou .

(Conclusion of November 21, 2014, Proceedings.)


19/19

19

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF THURSTON

The Honorable Judge Christine M. Schaller, Presiding

_____________________________________________________________Arthur West,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Washington State Liquor ControlBoard, et al,

Defendant.

))))))))))

Case No. 13-2-02227-1

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

____________________________________________________________

STATE OF WASHINGTON )) ss

COUNTY OF THURSTON )

I, Kathryn A. Beehler, Official Reporter of the Superior

Court of the State of Washington, in and for the county of

Thurston, do hereby certify:

That the foregoing pages, 1 through 19, inclusive,

comprise a true and correct transcript of the proceedings

held in the above-entitled matter, as designated by Counsel

to be included in the transcript, reported by me on the

21st day of November, 2014.

Kathryn A. Beehler, ReporterC.C.R. No. 2248

11-21-14 west v. liquor control board

Documents