Commonwealth, Department of Corrections v. Chestnut

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the DOC’s argument regarding the unreasonable burden of complying with open records requests of inmates as a whole class of people misses the mark because the unreasonable burden language in KRS 61.878(6
• public agency “bears the burden to rebut the strong presumption in favor of disclosure”
• “[I]t is clear to us that the prospect of a public agency’s potentially negligent disclosure of protected items is simply an insufficient reason to thwart the openness the General Assembly sought to achieve when it enacted the Open Records Act.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).