De Brabant v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding Zink’s challenge to a pseudonym order moot because she would receive the requested records revealing the true names of the parties
• explaining that courts “strive to avoid a construction [of a statute] that would render a portion of a statute meaningless”
• “Despite the PRA’s presumption of openness and transparency, the legislature has made certain public records exempt from production.”
• the PRA’s “other statute” exemption applies to only those exemptions explicitly identified in other statutes
• “Because we find that these records are available, it is unnecessary to consider whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the plaintiffs to proceed in pseudonym. The issue is moot.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).