Case: Friedmann v. Corrections Corporation of America

The Clearinghouse does not have access to a docket for this case. Information on this case comes from the petition, available court opinions, and articles from the Prison Legal News.

On May 19, 2008, an associate editor for the Prison Legal News (PLN) filed a petition under Tennessee’s public records law, seeking access to various documents in possession of the defendant Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), a private correctional service operating several facilities in Tennessee, in the Chancery Court for Davidson County, Tennessee. The plaintiff was also a former CCA prisoner. Prior to filing the suit, the plaintiff sent CCA a public records request for documents related to CCA’s operation of prison and jails in Tennessee that CCA denied. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff sought attorney’s fees and injunctive relief ordering the defendant to grant him access to the records.

On July 29, 2008, the Chancery Court (Chancellor Claudia C. Bonnyman) held, for the first time, that the defendant was subject to public records laws because the private prison company was the functional equivalent of a government agency. The court ordered the defendant to produce the requested records. CCA appealed. Joined by various journalist organizations, such as the Associated Press, the ACLU of Tennessee filed an amicus brief in support of the position that CCA was the functional equivalent of a government agency and should be treated as such for public records purposes.

On August 5, 2009, the Tennessee Court of Appeals (Judges D. Michael Swiney, Herschel P. Franks, and John W. McClarty) affirmed that CCA was the functional equivalent of a government agency and subject to public records law. 2009 WL 2407755. Following a motion to rehear, the Court of Appeals issued a revised ruling on September 16, 2009 and clarified that the records requested by PLN were subject to disclosure for all but one of CCA’s Tennessee facilities. 310 S.W.3d 366. The Court of Appeals then remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings to determine which of the requested documents fell within the statutory definition of public records. The Supreme Court of Tennessee denied review on March 1, 2010.

On remand, CCA argued that the settlement agreements and settlement reports did not fall within the statutory definition of public records and were confidential because they were the attorney’s work product. On December 1, 2011, the Chancery Court held that both the settlement agreements and reports were public records. The Chancery Court ordered CCA to produce the settlement agreements and report. The Chancery Court awarded attorney’s fees of $28,367.50 because CCA had acted in bad faith in refusing to disclose the settlement agreements.

Again, CCA appealed, and on February 28, 2013, the Court of Appeals (Judges Frank G. Clement, Jr., Patricia J. Cottrell, and Richard H. Dinkins) held that the settlement agreements were public records and that CCA was required to produce the settlement agreements related to the operation of the correctional facilities. 2013 WL 784584. The Court of Appeals also affirmed the trial court’s award of $28,367.50 in attorney’s fees. In addition, the Court of Appeals ordered CCA to pay attorney's fees and expenses incurred on appeal to the extent that the fees pertained to the settlement agreements, but not the settlement reports. The Court of Appeals remanded the case for a final determination of the total amount of attorney’s fees.

Following remand, in May 2013, Prison Legal News reported that CCA paid negotiated attorney’s fees of $50,000. As of August 13, 2019, there has been no further reported activity on this case, and presumably, the case is now closed.