Public Records Laws by State: FOIA Guide for All 50 States (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 4, 2026). · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. · 51 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Every US state, plus the District of Columbia, has a public records law that gives the public a right to see government records. The federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, is a separate law that reaches only federal agencies. Which law you use depends on who holds the record, not on what the record is about.
The Two Systems: Federal FOIA and 51 State Laws
Records access in the United States runs on two tracks that do not overlap. The federal Freedom of Information Act covers federal executive-branch agencies: departments, military departments, government corporations, government-controlled corporations, and independent regulatory agencies, as those terms are used in 5 U.S.C. § 552. Congress, the federal courts, and the President's immediate personal staff sit outside that definition, so FOIA does not reach them.
Everything else is state law. A county sheriff's incident report, a city council's email, a state university's contract, a school district's budget: all of those are governed by the public records statute of the state that holds them, and by nothing in the federal FOIA.
The practical consequence is simple. Before you write anything, identify the custodian. If the record sits with the FBI, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or USCIS, you are on the federal track. If it sits with any state, county, city, township, school district, or state agency, you are on that state's track, and the deadline, the fee rules and the appeal route all come from the table below.
Why Everyone Says FOIA
"FOIA" has become the generic verb for asking a government for records. Literally, it is the name of the federal statute. Several states also branded their own law that way: Virginia's is formally the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Michigan, South Carolina and West Virginia all use the same label for laws that have nothing to do with the federal act.
That matters when you file. Citing 5 U.S.C. § 552 to a county clerk cites a law that does not apply to them. Most agencies will process the request anyway, but the deadlines, exemptions and appeal rights that actually govern the answer are the state ones. Name the right statute and you get the right clock.
Public Records Laws by State
The table compares the four things that decide how a request goes: the statute that applies, whether a non-resident may file, what the response clock is, and where a denial gets reviewed. Every statute link goes to the official state source. Information is current as of August 2026; deadlines and fee rules change by legislative session, so check the linked statute before relying on a figure.
One reading note. Several states set a deadline to decide rather than a deadline to produce. Where that distinction exists in the statute, the cell says so.
| State | Law | Who can request | Response deadline | Appeal path |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Public Records Law, Ala. Code §§ 36-12-40 to 36-12-46 (link opens § 36-12-40) | Residents only. A resident is someone permanently domiciled in Alabama; proof may be required | Standard track: the codified § 36-12-44(a)(3) reads 10 business days to acknowledge, while the enrolled text of Act 2024-278 reads 10 days. The two sources conflict, so plan around the shorter clock. Substantive response within 15 business days of acknowledgment, extendable in 15-business-day increments. Time-intensive track: 10 business days to acknowledge (§ 36-12-44(b)(3)), then 45 business days measured from the requester's election to proceed, not from acknowledgment (§ 36-12-44(b)(4)) | No administrative appeal body appears in §§ 36-12-40 to 36-12-46; enforcement is judicial. See the state page linked at left |
| Alaska | Public Records Act, AS 40.25.100 to 40.25.295 | Any person | The statute sets a reasonableness standard rather than a day count: records are open under reasonable rules during office hours. The counted clock is in regulation. 2 AAC 96.325 gives executive-branch state agencies 10 working days for an initial response, extendable by 10 more, while municipalities and other bodies set their own rules | Administrative appeal within the agency, then superior court; injunctive relief without exhaustion (AS 40.25.123 to .125) |
| Arizona | Public Records Law, A.R.S. §§ 39-121 to 39-121.03 | Any person | No fixed day count. Records furnished promptly; failure to respond promptly is a deemed denial | Court only. Special action in superior court, with fees available to a substantially prevailing requester (§ 39-121.02) |
| Arkansas | Freedom of Information Act of 1967, A.C.A. § 25-19-101 et seq. (Attorney General's FOIA Handbook, 21st ed., reprinting the statutory text) | Residents only. The statute opens records to any citizen of the State of Arkansas. Separately, § 25-19-105(a)(1)(B) denies access to a person who has pleaded guilty to or been found guilty of a felony and is incarcerated, and to that person's representative, unless the representative is the person's attorney requesting disclosable information | Records not in active use or in storage must be produced immediately (§ 25-19-105(a)(6)). Where they are in active use or in storage, the custodian must certify that in writing and set a date and hour within three working days (§ 25-19-105(e)) | Court, but fast. An immediate appeal to circuit court under § 25-19-107, with a mandatory hearing within seven days and contempt available. Fees to a prevailing requester are mandatory except against state bodies, where fee-shifting is barred and the claim goes to the Arkansas Claims Commission within 60 days (§ 25-19-107(e)) |
| California | Public Records Act, Cal. Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq. | Any person | 10 calendar days to determine whether the request seeks disclosable records, extendable 14 days. This is a determination clock, not a production clock | Court only. Verified petition to superior court (§ 7923.100); costs and fees to a prevailing requester (§ 7923.115) |
| Colorado | Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-200.1 et seq. (Office of Legislative Legal Services summary of CORA) | Any person | Inspection of records not readily available must happen within a reasonable time, and a reasonable time is presumed to be three working days, with a limited extension available where the Act's listed extenuating circumstances apply | Court. A requester who prevails shall be awarded costs and reasonable attorney's fees. Note that criminal justice records sit outside CORA entirely and run under the Criminal Justice Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-301 et seq. |
| Connecticut | Freedom of Information Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 1-200 to 1-241 | Any person | No fixed production deadline, but a written denial is due within 4 business days, or 10 for personnel and medical files | Binding commission. Appeal to the Freedom of Information Commission within 30 days; it can impose civil penalties (§ 1-206) |
| Delaware | Freedom of Information Act, 29 Del. C. §§ 10001 to 10008 | Nuanced. The access clause says any citizen, without the words "of this State"; the policy declaration speaks of citizens of this State | 15 business days to provide access, deny, or state that more time is needed with a good-faith estimate (§ 10003(h)(1)) | Petition the Attorney General (§ 10005(e)), or sue within 60 days (§ 10005(b)). For records held by an office the Attorney General is required to represent, the AG petition is the mandatory first step |
| District of Columbia | Freedom of Information Act, D.C. Code §§ 2-531 to 2-540 | Any person | 15 days excluding weekends and holidays; 25 days for body-worn camera recordings; extensions of 10 and 15 days respectively. A body-worn camera request may only be submitted to the Metropolitan Police Department (§ 2-532(c)(2)(B)) | The Mayoral appeal is optional: § 2-537(a) says a requester "may" petition the Mayor, decided in 10 days. Agency silence is a deemed denial that exhausts administrative remedies automatically (§ 2-532(e)), so you may go straight to Superior Court. Council and Attorney General records go straight to court in any event (§ 2-537) |
| Florida | Public Records Act, Fla. Stat. ch. 119 | Any person | No fixed day count. Custodians must acknowledge promptly and respond in good faith (§ 119.07(1)(c)) | No administrative appeal body found in Ch. 119; enforcement is judicial, with fee-shifting. See the state page linked at left |
| Georgia | Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. §§ 50-18-70 to 50-18-77 | Any person. The 2012 rewrite made clear the right reaches people outside the state | 3 business days to produce responsive records, or to give a description and timetable within that window | Attorney General's Open Government Mediation Program (non-binding, local bodies), plus civil action in superior court (§ 50-18-73) |
| Hawaii | Uniform Information Practices Act, Haw. Rev. Stat. ch. 92F | Any person. Person is defined broadly, with no residency requirement | 10 business days to disclose or give notice under the administrative rules at HAR ch. 2-71, then 5 more business days to disclose; up to 20 business days in extenuating circumstances | Appeal to the Office of Information Practices, then judicial review |
| Idaho | Public Records Act, Idaho Code § 74-101 et seq. | Anyone may request, but residency changes the clock and the free tier | Residents: 3 working days to grant or deny, 10 working days to produce. Non-residents: 21 days to grant or deny, 35 days to produce (§ 74-103). Failure to respond within the allotted time is a deemed denial that opens the appeal right | Court only. District court petition within 180 days of denial; hearing set within 28 days (§ 74-115) |
| Illinois | Freedom of Information Act, 5 ILCS 140/1 et seq. (Attorney General's Public Access Counselor guide) | Any person. Under § 3(c) a body may ask your purpose in only two situations: to determine whether the request is for a commercial purpose, and to decide a fee-waiver request | 5 business days, extendable 5 more for seven statutory reasons; 21 working days for commercial-purpose requests. Silence past the deadline is treated as a denial, and a body in that position may not charge fees for records it later produces | Binding opinions available. Request for Review to the Attorney General's Public Access Counselor within 60 days, or suit in circuit court (5 ILCS 140/9.5, 140/11) |
| Indiana | Access to Public Records Act, Ind. Code § 5-14-3 | Any member of the public | No fixed response deadline. IC 5-14-3-3 requires a response within a reasonable time and sets no day count. The often-quoted 24-hour and 7-day figures are deemed-denial triggers in IC 5-14-3-9(b)-(c): a denial occurs 24 hours after any agency employee refuses inspection in person or by phone, and, for a request mailed or faxed, 7 days after receipt | Office of the Public Access Counselor issues opinions, plus court. Whether those opinions bind an agency is unconfirmed. See the state page linked at left |
| Iowa | Examination of Public Records, Iowa Code ch. 22 | Every person | No fixed deadline. Production must occur without unreasonable delay. The 10-business-day and 20-calendar-day figures in § 22.8(4) are a ceiling on justified delay, not a response deadline | Iowa Public Information Board. A free complaint within 60 days under Iowa Code ch. 23; the board holds contested-case proceedings and issues orders with the force of law (§ 23.6(8)), enforceable in district court (§ 23.10(3)). Mandamus or injunction in district court is also available (§§ 22.5, 22.10) |
| Kansas | Open Records Act, K.S.A. 45-215 et seq. | Any person | Act on the request as soon as possible, and no later than the end of the third business day (§ 45-218(d)). If access is not granted immediately, the custodian must give a detailed explanation of the delay and the earliest date the record will be available. On request, the written statement of the grounds for a denial, citing the specific provision relied on, is due by the end of the third business day after that request for that statement is received, not after the records request | District court by injunction or mandamus (§ 45-222); the Attorney General has independent enforcement power (§ 45-251); fee disputes go to the Secretary of Administration |
| Kentucky | Open Records Act, KRS 61.870 to 61.884 | Residents only, but the definition is broad: people who live, work, or own property in Kentucky, registered business entities, anyone authorized to act on behalf of someone in those categories, and news-gathering organizations (KRS 61.870(10)) | 5 days excluding weekends and holidays to determine whether to comply and to notify in writing (KRS 61.880(1)) | Attorney General issues an Open Records Decision within 20 days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, extendable by up to 30 additional work days in unusual circumstances. Unappealed after 30 days it has the force of law; either party may appeal to circuit court (KRS 61.880) |
| Louisiana | Public Records Law, La. R.S. 44:1 et seq. | Any person of the age of majority | The general rule is R.S. 44:33: a record not in active use must be presented immediately, and where it is in active use the custodian must certify that in writing and fix a day and hour within 3 days, excluding weekends and legal holidays. The separate 5-day written-notice duty in R.S. 44:32(D) applies only where the custodian questions whether the item is a public record at all | Court only. Mandamus, injunctive or declaratory relief in district court, with fees and damages (R.S. 44:35) |
| Maine | Freedom of Access Act, 1 M.R.S.A. §§ 400 to 414 | Any person | 5 working days to acknowledge receipt; a written denial is also due within 5 working days (§ 408-A) | Superior Court within 30 days of the written refusal; the agency answers within 14 days (§ 409) |
| Maryland | Public Information Act, Md. Code, Gen. Prov. § 4-101 et seq. | A person or governmental unit | 30 days to grant or deny and to produce. If production will take more than 10 working days, the custodian must say so within 10 working days (§ 4-203) | Two free administrative stages before court. The Public Access Ombudsman first (Gen. Prov. § 4-1B-04, determination within 90 calendar days, covering exemptions, timeliness and fees), which is a prerequisite to a complaint to the State Public Information Act Compliance Board within 30 days (§ 4-1A-05). The Board can order production, reduce or refund a fee over $350, and waive fees. A circuit court complaint remains available, with the custodian bearing the burden (§ 4-362) |
| Massachusetts | Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66, § 10 | No residency restriction | 10 business days to grant, deny, or seek an extension. Extensions run to 15 business days for state agencies and 25 for municipalities | Supervisor of Records in the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office decides within 10 business days (c. 66, § 10A); review of that order is by certiorari in superior court. Separately, § 10A(c) preserves an independent civil action to enforce the chapter, in which the court decides the withholding de novo and expedites the case |
| Michigan | Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231 et seq. | A person, but incarcerated individuals are excluded from the statutory definition of person and have no FOIA right (MCL 15.232(g)) | 5 business days to grant, deny, partially deny, or extend by up to 10 business days. Only one extension per request (MCL 15.235) | Written appeal to the head of the public body, decided in 10 business days, or circuit court within 180 days (MCL 15.240) |
| Minnesota | Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 13 | A person. Records are called government data and are classified, rather than presumed public as a block | No fixed day count. Requests must be met in an appropriate and prompt manner, and copies supplied as soon as reasonably possible | Complaint to the Office of Administrative Hearings, with an ALJ probable-cause finding in 20 business days (§ 13.085), or civil action (§ 13.08) |
| Mississippi | Public Records Act of 1983, Miss. Code Ann. § 25-61-1 et seq. | Any person | 7 working days to produce or deny where the body has adopted written procedures, with a written explanation required if it cannot meet day seven; 1 working day where no procedures were adopted | Complaint to the Mississippi Ethics Commission or a suit in chancery court. Section 25-61-13 expressly says no party has to exhaust administrative remedies first, so the Commission is an option, not a prerequisite |
| Missouri | Sunshine Law, Ch. 610 RSMo | The public; no residency restriction | Act on the request as soon as possible, and no later than the end of the third business day (§ 610.023.3). Production itself may run longer for reasonable cause, with a written explanation and an earliest-available date. On request, the written statement of the grounds for a denial is due by the end of the third business day after that request for the statement (§ 610.023.4) | Circuit court, with suit filed within one year of when the violation was ascertainable (§ 610.027) |
| Montana | Const. art. II, § 9; Mont. Code Ann. § 2-6-1006 | Every person | Check who holds the record first. Every day count in § 2-6-1006(3) applies only to a public agency that is not a local government: 5 business days to acknowledge, 5 working days after acknowledgment for a single readily identifiable record, and 90 days, or 6 months where 90 is not feasible, for anything that cannot be readily identified and gathered. Section 2-6-1006(3)(a)(ii) pulls records about a specified person or piece of property, such as applications, vital records, licenses, permits and registrations, out of the 5-day rule. A local government, including a county, city, town or school district, sits outside subsection (3) entirely under § 2-6-1006(1)(b)(ii) and owes only a response in a timely manner | District court complaint after denial or a missed deadline; costs and fees available (§ 2-6-1009) |
| Nebraska | Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 84-712 to 84-712.09 | Section 84-712(1) empowers "all residents of this state and all other persons interested in the examination of the public records as defined in section 84-712.01," in the wording it has carried since LB43 (2024). It is residents, not citizens, and the second clause reaches non-residents. Residents get the first 8 hours of labor free; non-residents can be charged for staff time from the start | 4 business days to provide access, deny in writing, or explain in writing with the earliest practicable date (§ 84-712(4)) | Petition the Attorney General, who decides within 15 calendar days, or seek mandamus in district court (§ 84-712.03) |
| Nevada | Public Records Act, NRS ch. 239 | Any person | End of the fifth business day to provide access, disclaim custody, give a date, or deny with a legal citation (NRS 239.0107) | District court application to compel disclosure, with costs and fees to a prevailing requester (NRS 239.011) |
| New Hampshire | Right-to-Know Law, RSA ch. 91-A | The statute says every citizen. How non-residents are treated in practice is not verified here | 5 business days to provide the record, deny it, or explain the delay with an estimated timeframe and cost | Ombudsman or court, but not both. File a complaint with the Right-to-Know Ombudsman under RSA 91-A:7-b for a $25 fee, waivable for inability to pay, or petition superior court directly. The forums are mutually exclusive: RSA 91-A:7, III provides that petitioning the court forecloses filing with the ombudsman, and paragraph IV provides that filing with the ombudsman forecloses the court until the ombudsman issues a final ruling or the deadline for it passes. Either outcome may then be appealed to superior court within 30 days (RSA 91-A:7-c) |
| New Jersey | Open Public Records Act, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq., as amended by P.L. 2024, c.16 | Any person. OPRA is often described as resident-only because the policy declaration mentions citizens of this State, but the operative access clause at 47:1A-5(a) says any person. An anonymous request is allowed but cannot be carried into a challenge | 7 business days to grant or deny, or 14 business days for a commercial request. Failure to respond in that window is a denial. The Government Records Council request form is mandatory, and an incomplete form may be denied | Requester's choice: the Government Records Council (free, mediation first) or Superior Court, either filed within 45 days of the denial (47:1A-6, 47:1A-7). Under P.L. 2024, c.16, a fee award is discretionary, and mandatory only for an unreasonable denial, bad faith, or a knowing violation |
| New Mexico | Inspection of Public Records Act, NMSA 1978 ch. 14, art. 2 (Department of Justice compliance guide, Ninth Edition) | Every person; no reason may be required (§ 14-2-8(C)) | 15 calendar days is the outer limit. If inspection will not happen within 3 business days, the custodian must explain in writing when it will (§ 14-2-8(D)) | District court; no exhaustion of internal appeals required. A prevailing private requester shall be awarded damages, costs and fees (§ 14-2-12) |
| New York | Freedom of Information Law, Public Officers Law art. 6 | Any person | 5 business days to make the record available, deny in writing, or acknowledge with an approximate date. Further delay past 20 business days needs a written reason and a date certain | Written appeal to the agency head within 30 days, decided in 10 business days, then an Article 78 proceeding in Supreme Court (§ 89(4)) |
| North Carolina | Public Records Law, N.C. Gen. Stat. ch. 132 | Any person; no purpose or motive may be required (§ 132-6) | No general fixed deadline; the standard is as promptly as possible. A 25-business-day deadline applies only to records tied to an announced economic-development project | Court only, and mediation comes first. Section 132-9(a) provides that the court has no jurisdiction over the action unless the requester has complied with the mediation required by G.S. 7A-38.3E, so mediation is a precondition to being heard rather than an alternative. Once filed, the action is set for immediate hearing, and § 132-9(c) says fees shall go to a requester who substantially prevails |
| North Dakota | Open Records Law, N.D. Cent. Code ch. 44-04 | Any requester. A body may not ask your identity, motive or reason | No fixed deadline. The statute is violated when access is denied or unreasonably delayed, rather than at a day count | Attorney General opinion, requested within 30 days of the violation, with 7 days to cure, and/or a civil action. The civil action carries a short limitations period: 60 days from when you knew or should have known of the violation, or 30 days after an Attorney General opinion, whichever is later (§§ 44-04-21.1, 44-04-21.2(1)) |
| Ohio | Public Records Act, Ohio Rev. Code § 149.43 | Any person. Incarcerated requesters face a judicial-approval screen for some records | No fixed deadline. Records must be prepared promptly and made available within a reasonable period of time | Two routes that buy different things, after a written complaint and a 3-business-day cure period (§ 149.43(C)). A Court of Claims complaint costs $25 and gets a special master, but recovers only the filing fee and costs: no attorney fees and no statutory damages. Mandamus is the only route to statutory damages of $100 per business day, capped at $1,000, plus attorney fees |
| Oklahoma | Open Records Act, 51 O.S. §§ 24A.1 to 24A.34 | Any person; no residency, citizenship, or purpose requirement | No fixed deadline. Prompt and reasonable access, and a current request may not be stalled behind a slower earlier one (§ 24A.5(6)) | Public Access Counselor Unit in the Attorney General's office (§ 24A.40): a free request for review within 30 days, with the Attorney General advising within 60 days. Commercial requesters are excluded and the review terminates once suit is filed. Before suing you must give the body and the Attorney General at least 10 business days' written notice (§ 24A.17(C)) |
| Oregon | Public Records Law, ORS 192.311 to 192.478 | Any person | 5 business days to acknowledge, then a complete response as soon as reasonably possible and no later than 10 business days after the acknowledgment deadline (ORS 192.324, 192.329) | Petition the Attorney General for state-agency records, or the district attorney for other public bodies, then court (ORS 192.411, 192.415) |
| Pennsylvania | Right-to-Know Law, 65 P.S. §§ 67.101 et seq. (Act 3 of 2008, full text) | A requester is defined as "a person that is a legal resident of the United States" (Act 3 of 2008). That is not a Pennsylvania residency test, but it is not open to anyone in the world either | 5 business days to respond, or the request is deemed denied and the appeal clock starts (§ 67.901). An extension needs written notice inside those same 5 business days, and more than 30 further days requires the requester's written agreement (§ 67.902) | Office of Open Records. Appeal within 15 business days; a Final Determination normally within 30 days; then a judicial appeal within 30 days, to Commonwealth Court for a Commonwealth agency (§ 1301) or the Court of Common Pleas for a local agency (§ 1302) |
| Rhode Island | Access to Public Records Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 38-2-1 et seq. | Any person or entity; a reason may not be required or considered | 10 business days to permit inspection or issue a written denial, extendable 20 more business days for voluminous requests. Missing it is a denial | Appeal to the body's chief administrative officer, decided in 10 business days, then an Attorney General complaint or Superior Court (§§ 38-2-8, 38-2-9) |
| South Carolina | Freedom of Information Act, S.C. Code Ann. § 30-4-10 et seq. | Any person. Incarcerated individuals cannot use FOIA to obtain records | 10 business days to determine, or 20 for records more than 24 months old; then production within 30 calendar days, or 35 for older records | Court only, filed within one year, with the first hearing scheduled within 10 days (§ 30-4-100) |
| South Dakota | SDCL ch. 1-27, Public Records and Files | All citizens of the state and all other persons interested in examining public records | Promptly, and no later than 10 business days after a written request. Missing the deadline or a given estimate is a denial (SDCL 1-27-37) | Hearing examiners. Notice of Review with the Office of Hearing Examiners, or a civil action, within 90 days; then circuit court (SDCL 1-27-38 to 1-27-43) |
| Tennessee | Public Records Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503 (Office of Open Records Counsel model policy, quoting the statute) | Residents only. Only citizens of this state have the guaranteed right; a government-issued photo ID showing an address may be required | Promptly. If that is not practicable, 7 business days to produce, deny in writing, or complete the state response form (§ 10-7-503(a)(2)(B)) | Court only. Petition the Chancery Court for the county where the body sits (§ 10-7-505) |
| Texas | Public Information Act, Tex. Gov't Code ch. 552 | Any person | No fixed production deadline. § 552.221(a) requires production promptly, meaning as soon as possible and within a reasonable time. Two different things carry the 10-business-day figure: § 552.221(d) requires the officer to certify in writing and set a date and hour if the information cannot be produced within 10 business days, and § 552.301 gives the agency 10 business days to ask the Attorney General for a ruling when it wants to withhold. Neither is a delivery deadline | The Attorney General ruling process is triggered by the agency, not the requester. A requester's own remedy is a suit for a writ of mandamus (§ 552.321) |
| Utah | Government Records Access and Management Act, Utah Code § 63G-2-204 (requests and response times) | Any person filing a written request with name, address and phone number | 10 business days, or 5 business days where the requester shows the request benefits the public rather than themselves. Journalists are presumed to qualify (§ 63G-2-204) | Written denial under § 63G-2-205, then an appeal to the agency's chief administrative officer within 30 days (§ 63G-2-401), then to the director of the Government Records Office (§ 63G-2-403, as amended effective May 6, 2026, which replaced the State Records Committee), then district court (§ 63G-2-404). Ombudsman mediation can toll the ladder (§ 63A-12-204) |
| Vermont | Public Records Act, 1 V.S.A. §§ 315 to 320 | Any person | 3 business days to produce the record or a copy, extendable to 10 business days from receipt for unusual circumstances. Missing the limit is a deemed denial (§ 318) | Administrative appeal to the head of the agency, decided in 5 business days, then the Civil Division of the Superior Court under § 319: review is de novo, the agency carries the burden, the case takes docket precedence, and fees and litigation costs are mandatory for a complainant who substantially prevails, with a narrow exception where the agency concedes and produces within the time to answer (§§ 318, 319) |
| Virginia | Freedom of Information Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3700 et seq. | Residents only. Open to citizens of the Commonwealth, plus representatives of in-state newspapers, magazines and broadcasters. One carve-out runs the other way: § 2.2-3706.1(D) requires closed criminal investigative files to be disclosed on request to the victim, a deceased victim's immediate family, a minor victim's parent or guardian, and habeas or actual-innocence counsel, regardless of whether they are citizens of the Commonwealth | 5 working days, with 7 additional work days where a response is not practically possible, and up to 60 work days for criminal investigative files (§ 2.2-3704) | Court only. Petition for mandamus or injunction in general district or circuit court. The 7-day hearing is conditional: it applies only if the public body received a copy of the petition at least 3 working days before filing. The body bears the burden, and a petitioner who substantially prevails recovers reasonable costs and attorney fees (§ 2.2-3713) |
| Washington | Public Records Act, RCW 42.56 | Any person. Agencies shall not distinguish among persons requesting records and may not ask your purpose (RCW 42.56.080) | 5 business days to provide the record, link to it, acknowledge with an estimate, seek clarification, or deny in writing (RCW 42.56.520) | Superior court motion, de novo, with penalties up to $100 per day plus costs and fees; filed within one year (RCW 42.56.550) |
| West Virginia | Freedom of Information Act, W. Va. Code § 29B-1-1 et seq. | Every person | 5 business days to furnish copies, set an inspection time and place, or deny with written reasons (§ 29B-1-3(d)) | Court only. Injunctive or declaratory relief in circuit court, de novo, with the burden on the public body (§ 29B-1-5). A requester who succeeds in that suit shall be awarded attorney fees and costs (§ 29B-1-7) |
| Wisconsin | Public Records Law, Wis. Stat. §§ 19.31 to 19.39 | Any requester | No fixed deadline. Authorities must fill the request or notify of a denial as soon as practicable and without delay (§ 19.35(4)(a)) | Mandamus in circuit court, brought by you or by the district attorney or Attorney General on your behalf; fees, costs and damages of at least $100 to a prevailing requester (§ 19.37) |
| Wyoming | Public Records Act, Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 16-4-201 to 16-4-205 | Any person | Readily available records released immediately; all records no later than 30 calendar days from acknowledged receipt absent good cause. If the record is not in that entity's custody, notice within 7 business days (§ 16-4-202) | Ombudsman or district court, at any time. Section 16-4-202(c)(v) is the general route: an applicant may at any time file a complaint with the ombudsman designated by the governor, or petition the district court, for a determination whether the custodian showed good cause, and the reviewing body shall examine the records in camera. Section 16-4-203(f) is the escalation after a missed mutually agreed release date or a defied ombudsman order, and it is where the powers to mediate, set a release timeline and waive fees sit |
Ready to file? Start with the step-by-step guide to filing a FOIA request, or build the letter itself with the free FOIA request generator, which fills in the right statute, deadline and appeal language for the jurisdiction you pick.
How the Federal FOIA Works
The federal FOIA gives any person the right to request records from a federal executive-branch agency. There is no citizenship requirement, no residency requirement, and no requirement to say why you want the records.
The 20-Business-Day Clock
An agency must make a determination on your request within 20 days, "excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays," under 5 U.S.C. § 552. It may take up to 10 additional working days by giving written notice of unusual circumstances.
Note what that clock covers. It is a deadline to determine whether the agency will comply and to tell you so, not a deadline to place the documents in your hands. Complex requests routinely take far longer in practice. Government-wide, the executive branch received about 1.7 million FOIA requests in fiscal year 2025, and agency reporting shows most simple requests closing inside 20 days while complex ones spread across much longer bands.
The Nine Exemptions
FOIA's presumption is disclosure. An agency withholds only under one of nine exemptions, and it must tell you which one it used:
- National security. Information properly classified to protect national security.
- Internal personnel rules. Information related solely to an agency's internal personnel rules and practices.
- Withheld by another statute. Information another federal law prohibits from being disclosed.
- Trade secrets and confidential business information. Commercial or financial information that is confidential or privileged.
- Privileged inter-agency communications. Deliberative process (for records created less than 25 years before the request), attorney work product, and attorney-client privilege.
- Personal privacy. Information whose release would invade another individual's personal privacy.
- Law enforcement records. Records compiled for law enforcement purposes, where release would interfere with proceedings, deprive someone of a fair trial, invade personal privacy, expose a confidential source, reveal investigative techniques, or endanger someone's life or physical safety.
- Financial institution supervision. Information concerning the supervision of financial institutions.
- Well data. Geological information on wells.
An exemption is permission to withhold, not an order to. Agencies can and sometimes do release exempt material as a discretionary matter.
What It Costs, and When It Does Not
Fees depend on which requester category you fall into. Commercial requesters pay search, duplication and review. Educational and scientific institutions and news media pay duplication only. Everyone else pays search and duplication. For non-commercial requesters, the first two hours of search time and the first 100 pages are free, so a tightly scoped request often costs nothing at all.
A fee waiver is separate and narrower. It applies where disclosure is in the public interest because it is "likely to contribute significantly to public understanding" of government operations and "is not primarily in the commercial interest" of the requester. Ask for it in the request itself and explain how the records serve that public understanding.
foia.gov Is a Portal, Not an Office
There is no central federal FOIA office that answers requests. As FOIA.gov puts it, each federal agency handles its own records, across roughly one hundred agencies subject to the Act. FOIA.gov is a front door: it hosts the government-wide data, explains the law, and routes you to the right agency's own request system.
Some agencies now require their own portal. USCIS, for example, moved to online-only FOIA filing through first.uscis.gov as of January 22, 2026. The FBI takes requests through its eFOIPA portal at efoia.fbi.gov, and mail requests for your own records use DOJ Form DOJ-361 with either a notarized signature or the statutory perjury declaration.
Requests must be in writing and must "reasonably describe" the records. Agencies do not have to create a record that does not exist, conduct research for you, or answer questions.
Appeal, Mediation, Then Court
If an agency denies your request, you file an administrative appeal with that agency. FOIA gives you at least 90 days to file it, and the agency must decide within 20 business days.
Beyond that, the Office of Government Information Services at the National Archives serves as the federal FOIA ombuds and offers free mediation between requesters and agencies. Reach it at archives.gov/ogis, ogis@nara.gov, or 202-741-5770.
The final route is a lawsuit in federal district court, which 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) allows where you reside, where you have your principal place of business, where the records are located, or in the District of Columbia.
Response Deadlines Are Not All the Same Thing
Comparing state deadlines is where most quick summaries go wrong, because three genuinely different things get printed in the same column.
Fixed-count states set a number. About a dozen states in the table run on some version of a five-day clock: Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington and West Virginia count five business days, Maine and Virginia count five working days, and Kentucky counts five days excluding weekends and legal holidays. Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah use ten business days for the initial response. Maryland uses thirty days. Idaho splits its count by residency, and no other state does that.
Reasonable-time states set no number at all. Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Wisconsin all use a promptness standard: records go out without unreasonable delay, and what counts as unreasonable depends on volume, staffing and the need for legal review. Florida and Arizona work the same way. This is not a research gap in those states; it is how their legislatures wrote the law. Alaska is a hybrid worth separating out: its statute sets only a reasonableness standard, but 2 AAC 96.325 gives executive-branch state agencies a 10-working-day initial response clock, so the day count comes from regulation and does not reach municipalities.
Determination-versus-production states set a fast clock for an answer and a slower, softer one for the documents. California's 10 days is a deadline to decide whether disclosable records exist, extendable by 14. Connecticut's 4 business days is a deadline for a written denial. New York's 5 business days lets an agency simply acknowledge with an approximate date. Maryland requires notice within 10 working days if production will take longer than that.
Three figures in particular get repeated wrongly. Texas does not have a 10-business-day production deadline. Section 552.221(a) requires production "promptly." Two separate provisions carry the 10-business-day figure: § 552.221(d) makes the officer certify in writing and set a date and hour if the records cannot be produced in that window, and § 552.301 is the deadline for a governmental body to ask the Attorney General for a ruling when it wants to withhold something. Iowa does not have a 10-day or 20-day deadline either. Those numbers come from § 22.8(4), which caps how long a good-faith delay may run while confidentiality is assessed. Indiana's 24-hour and 7-day figures are not deadlines at all: IC 5-14-3-9(b) and (c) use them to fix the moment a refusal becomes a legally recognized denial, which is what opens your right to sue, while IC 5-14-3-3 leaves the response duty at a reasonable time. None of them is a promise about when you get records.
Several states also convert a missed deadline into an automatic denial you can appeal: Arizona, the District of Columbia (§ 2-532(e), which also exhausts your administrative remedies automatically), Idaho, Illinois, New Jersey, Pennsylvania (§ 901), Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont and Virginia (§ 2.2-3704(E)) all work this way, which is useful, because silence otherwise leaves you with nothing to appeal from.
Who Is Allowed to File
The default across the country is that any person may request public records, without regard to residency, citizenship or purpose. Washington puts the rule most bluntly: agencies "shall not distinguish among persons requesting records" and may not ask your purpose, under RCW 42.56.080. New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Rhode Island all bar an agency from requiring a reason.
Five states restrict the statutory right to their own residents:
- Alabama, where a resident is someone permanently domiciled in the state and proof of residency may be demanded (Ala. Code § 36-12-43).
- Arkansas, where the Freedom of Information Act opens records to "any citizen of the State of Arkansas."
- Kentucky, though its definition is broad: people who live in, work in, or own real property in Kentucky, registered business entities, anyone authorized to act for them, and news-gathering organizations (KRS 61.870(10)).
- Tennessee, where only citizens of the state have the guaranteed right and a government-issued photo ID showing an address may be required.
- Virginia, which opens records to "citizens of the Commonwealth" plus representatives of in-state newspapers, magazines and broadcast stations (Va. Code § 2.2-3704(A)).
Two states are commonly listed as resident-only and should not be. New Jersey's operative access clause at N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(a) says the custodian shall permit a record to be inspected "by any person"; the "citizens of this State" phrase people quote comes from the legislative policy declaration, not from the access grant. Delaware is genuinely ambiguous rather than restrictive: 29 Del. C. § 10003(a) says access shall not be denied to "any citizen," without the words "of this State," while the chapter's policy declaration at § 10001 speaks of accountability to the citizens of this State.
Two more use the word citizen without the effect people expect. South Dakota is open in practice: SDCL 1-27-1 gives the right to "all citizens of this state, and all other persons interested in the examination of the public records," and that second clause reaches beyond South Dakota. New Hampshire is the genuinely unresolved one: RSA 91-A:4, I gives "every citizen" the right to inspect governmental records, and how a body treats a non-resident in practice is not something this page has verified. Treat it as an open question rather than as either an open door or a bar.
Pennsylvania sits outside both groups. The Right-to-Know Law defines a requester as "a person that is a legal resident of the United States," so the limit is national rather than state-level, and it turns on residence rather than citizenship. Someone living in Ohio may file in Pennsylvania; someone living abroad has no statutory right to.
Idaho belongs in its own category. Anyone may request, but Idaho Code § 74-103 gives residents 3 working days for a decision and 10 working days for production, against 21 days and 35 days for non-residents, and reserves the free tier of two hours of labor and 100 pages for residents. Nebraska draws a similar fee line: residents get the first eight cumulative hours of staff time free, while non-residents can be billed for staff time, including attorney review, from the first hour.
A residency rule is not a wall. Agencies in resident-only states may still fill a non-resident's request voluntarily, and Alabama's statute says so explicitly. What a non-resident loses is the enforceable right, and with it the appeal.
Where a Denial Gets Reviewed
The appeal route matters more than the deadline, because it decides whether contesting a refusal costs you a filing fee and a lawyer or nothing at all.
Binding administrative bodies are the strongest option and the rarest. Connecticut's Freedom of Information Commission hears appeals within 30 days of a denial and can impose civil penalties of $20 to $5,000 on a custodian who denied access without reasonable grounds. Illinois gives the Attorney General's Public Access Counselor authority to issue a binding opinion, which the public body must then take to circuit court if it disagrees. Kentucky's Attorney General issues an Open Records Decision within 20 days, excluding weekends and legal holidays and extendable by up to 30 additional work days, and if nobody appeals within 30 days that decision has the force of law and is enforceable in circuit court.
Dedicated records offices and tribunals sit a step below. Pennsylvania's Office of Open Records takes appeals within 15 business days and issues a Final Determination, normally within 30 days. Massachusetts routes appeals to the Supervisor of Records, who decides within 10 business days, and c. 66, § 10A(c) separately preserves an independent civil action decided de novo. New Jersey lets the requester choose between the Government Records Council and Superior Court. Ohio offers the Court of Claims as a lower-cost alternative to mandamus, after a written complaint and a three-business-day cure period, but the two are not interchangeable: only mandamus reaches statutory damages and attorney fees, while the $25 Court of Claims route recovers the filing fee and costs. South Dakota sends appeals to the Office of Hearing Examiners. Mississippi gives a choice rather than a sequence: § 25-61-13 lets a requester complain to the Ethics Commission or file in chancery court, and says expressly that no party has to exhaust administrative remedies first. Iowa's Public Information Board takes a free complaint within 60 days and can issue orders that carry the force of law and are enforceable in district court. Maryland runs a two-stage free route, the Public Access Ombudsman first and then the State Public Information Act Compliance Board, which can order production and cut or refund a fee. Oklahoma's Attorney General now houses a Public Access Counselor Unit under 51 O.S. § 24A.40. Hawaii's Office of Information Practices reviews denials, and Minnesota's go to an administrative law judge.
Ombudsman models exist in New Hampshire, where the Right-to-Know Ombudsman charges a waivable $25 filing fee under RSA 91-A:7-b and whose decisions are appealable to superior court within 30 days, though the ombudsman and the court are mutually exclusive forums rather than two bites at the same dispute. Wyoming's route starts at § 16-4-202(c)(v), which lets an applicant file an ombudsman complaint or petition the district court at any time, with in camera review of the records mandatory either way. The ombudsman's more familiar powers, to mediate, prescribe a release timeline and waive the agency's fees outright, sit one step further along in § 16-4-203(f), which applies once the entity misses a mutually agreed release date or defies an ombudsman order.
Attorney General review without binding force covers several states. North Dakota, Nebraska and Oregon let you petition for a determination. Georgia's Attorney General runs a voluntary mediation program for disputes with local governments. Kansas's Attorney General has independent enforcement power.
Court-only states leave litigation as the sole route: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin among them. That is less forbidding than it sounds, because most of these statutes shift fees. A prevailing requester recovers costs and reasonable attorney's fees under California Gov. Code § 7923.115, Virginia Code § 2.2-3713(D), New Mexico's § 14-2-12 (where the award is mandatory), and Washington's RCW 42.56.550, which also allows penalties of up to $100 a day. Oklahoma adds a procedural trap worth knowing in advance, and it applies even though the state now has an administrative route: under 51 O.S. § 24A.17(C) you must give the public body and the Attorney General at least 10 business days' written notice before filing suit. North Carolina has a harder gate still: under G.S. § 132-9(a) the court has no jurisdiction over a public records action unless the requester has first complied with the mediation required by G.S. § 7A-38.3E, so mediation there is a jurisdictional precondition rather than an option.
What Records Cost
Filing is free almost everywhere. Copies and staff time frequently are not, and the spread across states is wide.
Per-page caps run from 5 cents in Massachusetts and New Jersey, through 10 cents in Delaware (after 20 free pages), Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Michigan and Missouri, 15 cents in Florida, Illinois (after 50 free pages), Rhode Island and Washington's default schedule, 25 cents in Minnesota, New York, North Dakota and Oklahoma, up to $1.00 a page in New Mexico for documents 11x17 inches or smaller.
Labor charges are the bigger variable. Massachusetts and Maine cap staff time at $25 an hour, Rhode Island at $15, Montana at $25 with a $5 filing fee for complex requests, and Colorado at a statewide maximum of $41.37 an hour for research and retrieval, effective July 1, 2024, on top of a 25-cent-per-page cap. Virginia allows charges for search and review time and lets a public body demand a deposit where it determines in advance that charges are likely to exceed $200, so a broad Virginia request can stall on money before it stalls on law. Several states bill at the salary of the lowest-paid employee qualified to do the work, including Georgia, Kansas, New York and South Carolina. West Virginia goes the other way and forbids a search or retrieval fee entirely.
Free tiers matter more than caps for ordinary requests. Illinois gives the first 50 pages free and Delaware the first 20. Maine waives the first two hours of staff time, Massachusetts four hours for state agencies and two for larger municipalities, Maryland the first two hours, Rhode Island the first hour, and Nebraska eight cumulative hours for residents. Iowa charges nothing at all for records that take under 30 minutes to produce, and Minnesota may not charge anyone to inspect records on site.
A federal-style public-interest fee waiver is not universal, and readers should not assume one. Counting only public-interest waivers, one exists in some form in Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin. Rhode Island's belongs on the list with an asterisk, because § 38-2-4 frames the reduction or waiver as something a court orders rather than something you assert at the counter. Utah's sits at § 63G-2-203(4), which encourages an entity to fill a request free where release primarily benefits the public, where you are the subject of the record, or where your legal rights are directly implicated and you are impecunious, and a denied waiver is appealable and reviewed de novo. Indigency waivers are a separate category worth naming: Connecticut's § 1-212 is mandatory both for an indigent requester and where the records serve the general welfare, which is why it is on the list, while Louisiana has an indigency waiver at R.S. 44:32(C)(1)(a) and no public-interest branch at all, which is why it is not. Wisconsin's sits at § 19.35(3)(e), which lets an authority waive or reduce a fee where doing so is in the public interest, and Hawaii runs a separate public-interest waiver at HAR § 2-71-32 on top of the first $30 of search and review time that HAR § 2-71-31(a) already bars. Four more are worth naming because they are easy to miss in the fee sections: Illinois at 5 ILCS 140/6(c), Texas at § 552.267(a), which both say records shall be furnished free or at a reduced charge once the body finds a waiver is in the public interest, Nebraska at § 84-712(3)(h), and Arkansas at § 25-19-105(d)(3)(A)(iv), both discretionary and both limited to noncommercial requests. Arkansas carries a countervailing rule worth knowing before you ask for police video: A.C.A. § 25-19-112 makes retrieval, review, redaction and copying of law enforcement media chargeable, free only up to three hours, and up to $20 an hour above that. No waiver provision appears in the statutory text of several others, including Arizona, Florida, New York, Vermont and West Virginia, which cap costs instead. Where no waiver exists, the way to control cost is to narrow the request: name a date range, a specific office and a document type rather than asking for everything on a subject.
Police Reports and Body Camera Footage
Law enforcement records are the most-requested category and the least uniform. Some states run body camera footage through the ordinary records law with a longer clock, others carve it out entirely, and several built a separate statute with its own requester list and its own court standard.
South Carolina excludes it from FOIA outright. Under S.C. Code § 23-1-240(G)(1), body-worn camera data "is not a public record subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act." Access runs instead through criminal or civil discovery, a court order, or the agency's discretion.
The District of Columbia gives it a longer clock, and one address. Body-worn camera recordings get 25 days instead of the standard 15, extendable by 15 more, under D.C. Code § 2-532(c)(2)(A). Route the request correctly: § 2-532(c)(2)(B) provides that a body-worn camera request may only be submitted to the Metropolitan Police Department, so sending it to another District agency that happens to hold a copy is not a valid filing.
North Carolina built a separate track. G.S. § 132-1.4A is not part of the general public-records route: only a person depicted in the recording or a defined representative may request disclosure, the court reviews for abuse of discretion rather than de novo, and no attorney's fees may be awarded to either side, which is the opposite of the general § 132-9 rule.
Kentucky's statute distinguishes by what is on the recording. KRS 61.168 lets an agency decline to release footage in 14 privacy categories, such as the interior of a private residence, but footage showing a use of force, an arrest or detention, or the subject of a formal complaint against an officer is governed solely by the ordinary Open Records Act.
Minnesota opens footage in specific circumstances. Under Minn. Stat. § 13.825, recordings are generally private data, but data documenting an officer's discharge of a firearm or a use of force causing substantial bodily harm is public, the subject of a recording can request release, and where someone dies from police use of force the next of kin must be allowed to view the footage within five days and the agency must release it publicly within 14 days absent a written assertion of investigative interference.
Washington and Ohio price it rather than block it. RCW 42.56.240(14) lets an agency charge others the cost of redaction while a person directly involved in the incident pays nothing, and redaction time does not count against the response clock. Ohio caps video production charges at $75 an hour and $750 per request, and waives the video fee for crime victims.
Others fall in between. Kansas classifies body and vehicle camera recordings as criminal investigation records but gives the person depicted, a parent of a depicted minor, heirs of a deceased person depicted, and their attorneys a right to view within 20 days. Illinois exempts records the Law Enforcement Officer-Worn Body Camera Act prohibits from release. Michigan exempts recordings made in a private place. North Dakota exempts images taken in a private place. Wyoming makes peace officer recordings a discretionary-release category. Missouri closes mobile video while an investigation is active but lets the person depicted, their family, attorney or insurer request a complete copy. Florida exempts footage taken in a private residence, a healthcare facility, or anywhere a reasonable person would expect privacy. Louisiana requires a bodycam request to be incident-specific as to date, time, location or persons involved.
For where individual 911 recordings fit, see whether 911 calls are public records, which tracks that narrower question state by state.
Three Things People Get Wrong
Vital records are not records-act requests. Birth, death and marriage certificates run through state health departments and vital records offices under their own eligibility rules, which usually limit certified copies to the person named, immediate family and legal representatives. Filing a public records request for a death certificate sends it to the wrong office under the wrong law. Our state-by-state death records guide covers who is eligible and how to order. Property deeds are different again: they are recorded, indexed and generally open at the county level, which the property records guide explains.
Sunshine Law usually means open meetings, not open records. In Florida the nickname belongs to Chapter 286, the open-meetings law, while records requests run under Chapter 119, the Public Records Act. Missouri is the exception that causes the confusion: its Chapter 610 is formally the Sunshine Law and covers both meetings and records.
A state FOIA is not the federal FOIA. Virginia's statute is titled the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and it is state law with a five-working-day clock, a residency limit, and a mandamus remedy. Citing 5 U.S.C. § 552 to a Virginia county gets you nowhere; citing Va. Code § 2.2-3704 gets you a deadline.
Filing a Request That Works
Four habits do most of the work, whatever jurisdiction you are in.
Name the statute. "This is a request under the Ohio Public Records Act, R.C. § 149.43" tells the custodian which clock they are on and which exemptions they have to justify.
Describe records, not subjects. Agencies must find records that are reasonably described; they do not have to research a topic for you or answer questions. Ask for "all emails between the city manager and the vendor between March 1 and June 30, 2026" rather than "everything about the contract."
Set a cost ceiling. A line saying you authorize charges up to a stated amount and want to be contacted before that is exceeded prevents a request from stalling on an unanswered estimate.
Ask for the denial in writing, with the exemption cited. In most states that written denial is what starts your appeal window, and in several a missed deadline is itself a denial you can appeal.
The FOIA request generator assembles all four for the jurisdiction you select, with the correct statutory citation, deadline language and appeal reference. Nothing you enter is saved or transmitted. For the federal process end to end, including the FBI and USCIS paths, see how to file a FOIA request.
A Note on Currency
Public records statutes change every legislative session, and several states rewrote theirs recently. Alabama substantially restructured its law through Act 2024-278, adding a tiered acknowledgment and response timeline. New Jersey rewrote OPRA through P.L. 2024, c.16, effective September 3, 2024, and that is the version in force; the earlier P.L. 2023, c.113 text still circulates and is out of date, so check the date on any OPRA copy you are handed. California's Public Records Act was renumbered in 2023, so any citation to former Gov. Code § 6250 is out of date. Since July 1, 2026, Montana's day counts apply to a public agency that is not a local government, while counties, cities, towns and school districts owe only a response in a timely manner; the numbers themselves did not change.
A few states publish their statutes in places that are easy to get wrong. Arkansas routes its official code through a portal that blocks automated access, so the figures in the Arkansas cells come from the Attorney General's FOIA Handbook, which reprints A.C.A. §§ 25-19-101 through 25-19-112 in full, including the law enforcement media fee provision at § 25-19-112 that makes police video chargeable. Colorado's deadline and fee figures come from the Office of Legislative Legal Services summary of CORA. Tennessee and Illinois link to official state guidance rather than to a code page, because neither state serves the chapter text at a stable public URL.
This page provides general legal information about public records and FOIA statutes in the United States as of August 2026. It is not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created by reading it. Statutes, fee schedules and agency procedures change; confirm the current text with the linked official source before relying on a deadline or fee figure, and consult a lawyer licensed in the relevant jurisdiction about your specific situation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a fee to file a public records request?
Filing itself is free in nearly every jurisdiction. What costs money is copying and, in many states, staff time. Federal FOIA gives non-commercial requesters the first two hours of search and the first 100 pages at no charge, so a narrow request often costs nothing. State per-page caps run from 5 cents in Massachusetts to $1.00 a page in New Mexico, and several states give free tiers: Illinois waives the first 50 pages, Delaware the first 20, Minnesota charges nothing to inspect records on site, and Iowa charges nothing for records that take under 30 minutes to produce. Ask for a cost estimate up front and set a ceiling in the request so nothing gets billed without your approval.
Can I request records from a state I do not live in?
In most states, yes. The default rule is that any person may request, and Washington's statute goes further by barring agencies from distinguishing among requesters at all. Five states limit the statutory right to their own residents: Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia. Kentucky's definition is broad enough to cover anyone who works in or owns property in the state, along with news-gathering organizations. Idaho lets anyone request but gives non-residents 21 days for a decision instead of 3 and 35 days for production instead of 10. New Jersey is often listed as resident-only and should not be, because its operative clause says any person. An agency in a resident-only state may still fill a non-resident's request voluntarily; what a non-resident lacks is the enforceable right to make it.
What can I do if the agency just ignores my request?
Check first whether your state converts silence into a denial. Arizona, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont and Virginia all treat a missed deadline as a denial, which gives you something to appeal from, and in the District silence also exhausts your administrative remedies so you can go straight to Superior Court. Where an administrative body exists, that is the cheap route: the Connecticut FOI Commission, the Illinois Public Access Counselor, the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records, the New Jersey Government Records Council, the Massachusetts Supervisor of Records, the New Hampshire and Wyoming ombudsman offices, and the Ohio Court of Claims all take complaints without a lawyer. Several states let you petition the Attorney General instead, including Kentucky, Nebraska, North Dakota and Oregon. In court-only states the remedy is a suit to compel disclosure, and most of those statutes shift costs and attorney's fees to a requester who prevails.
Are police reports and body camera footage covered?
Basic incident and arrest reports are generally public, though states often let an agency withhold active investigative files. Body camera footage is treated far less uniformly. South Carolina excludes it from its FOIA entirely under S.C. Code section 23-1-240(G)(1). North Carolina and Kentucky built separate statutes with their own requester lists. The District of Columbia keeps it inside FOIA but gives it a 25-day clock instead of 15. Minnesota makes footage public when it documents a firearm discharge or a use of force causing substantial bodily harm. Washington and Ohio allow redaction and production charges rather than blocking access. Several states, including Michigan, North Dakota and Florida, exempt recordings made in private places. The practical step is to identify the state's dedicated body camera provision before filing, because the general records statute may not be the right route.
How long does a federal FOIA request actually take?
The statutory clock in 5 U.S.C. section 552 is 20 days, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal public holidays, for the agency to make a determination and tell you, with up to 10 more working days available on written notice of unusual circumstances. That is a deadline to decide, not to deliver. In practice, agency reporting shows most requests classified as simple closing inside the 20-day band, while requests classified as complex spread across much longer periods, some past 400 days. The executive branch received about 1.7 million requests in fiscal year 2025 across roughly a hundred agencies. Narrowing scope, filing with the specific agency component that holds the records, and answering clarification emails quickly are the three things that most reliably shorten the wait.
Does a public records request have to say why I want the records?
Almost never. New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Rhode Island expressly bar an agency from requiring a reason, and Washington bars asking about purpose except to check narrow statutory exemptions. Illinois allows two narrow questions under 5 ILCS 140/3(c): whether the request is for a commercial purpose, because that changes the deadline and the fee tier, and, where you have asked for a fee waiver, what your purpose is, because 5 ILCS 140/6(c) makes the waiver turn on it. The federal FOIA does not require a reason either, though stating one helps if you are asking for a fee waiver or for expedited processing, both of which turn on why the records matter.
Do I need to be a journalist or a lawyer to file?
No. Every one of these statutes is written for the general public. Journalist status matters only in specific places and only for cost or speed: federal FOIA puts news media in the duplication-only fee category, Utah presumes a request for a story or broadcast benefits the public and qualifies for a 5-business-day expedited response, and Kentucky and Nebraska fold news-gathering organizations into their residency and fee definitions. Nothing about the underlying right to the records depends on your occupation.
Updates
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the Kansas response-deadline cell: K.S.A. 45-218(d) sets a fixed 3-business-day deadline to act on every records request, not just on a request for a denial statement.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
State-by-state comparison
Each state guide below is paired with the governing statute our editors adjudicated for it, held in our own legal record and verified against the official source.
Each statute shown is the same adjudicated anchor its state guide renders, independently verified against primary sources. A dash means not yet adjudicated in our record — never that no law exists.
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Code of Alabama 1975, Title 36: Public Officers and Employees.
§ 36-12-43Public Policy; Definitions; Applicability.In force
(a) It is the policy of the state to promptly provide residents with the opportunity to inspect public records and to request a copy, subject to payment of reasonable fees and to appropriate protections for private, confidential, privileged, and other nonpublic information, and to the interest of the general public in having the business of government carried on efficiently and without undue interference. (b) For purposes of this article, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (1) BUSINESS DAY. A day that the public officer’s office is open to the public and conducting normal operations. (2) PUBLIC OFFICER. A public officer or his or her designee responsible for responding to public records requests. (3) RESIDENT. An individual who is permanently domiciled in Alabama with an expectation to remain in Alabama as demonstrated by reasonable proof of residency such as, but not limited to, an Alabama driver license or voter registration. (4) STANDARD REQUEST.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
California Government Code
§ 7920.000In forcecited in 2 of our articles
This division shall be known and may be cited as the California Public Records Act.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 34 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Edais v. Super. Ct. (California Court of Appeal 2023)“…under the California Public Records Act (CPRA or Act). (See Gov. Code, §§ 7920.000 et seq.; all unspecified statutory refe…”
- City of Fresno v. Superior Court (California Court of Appeal 2026)“…cords pursuant to the California Public Records Act (CPRA) (Gov. Code, § 7920.000 et. seq.) and subdivision (b)(1)(A)(ii)…”
- City of Gilroy v. Superior Court (California Supreme Court 2026)“…atute. First, does the California Public Records Act (CPRA; Gov. Code, § 7920.000 et seq.) authorize a superior court to…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: California Public Records Act: The 10-Day Rule, Fees, and Police Records
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 01 (Provisions of General Application), Chapter 14
§ 1-206(Formerly Sec. 1-21i). Denial of access to public records or meetings. Appeals. Notice. Orders. Civil penalty. Violation that constitutes obstruction or misconduct. Petition for relief from vexatious requester. Service of process upon commission. Frivolous appeals. Appeal re state hazardous waste program records.In force
(a) Any denial of the right to inspect or copy records provided for under section 1-210 shall be made to the person requesting such right by the public agency official who has custody or control of the public record, in writing, within four business days of such request, except when the request is determined to be subject to subsections (b) and (c) of section 1-214, in which case such denial shall be made, in writing, within ten business days of such request. Failure to comply with a request to so inspect or copy such public record within the applicable number of business days shall be deemed to be a denial. (b) (1) Any person denied the right to inspect or copy records under section 1-210 or wrongfully denied the right to attend any meeting of a public agency or denied any other right conferred by the Freedom of Information Act may appeal therefrom to the Freedom of Information Commission, by filing a notice of appeal with said commission.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 58 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Department of Public Safety v. Freedom of Information Commission (Connecticut Appellate Court 2007, 103 Conn. App. 571)“…t, the plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court pursuant to General Statutes §§ 1-206(d) and 4-183(a). By memorandum of decis…”
- Director of Health Affairs Policy Planning v. Freedom of Information Commission (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2009, 293 Conn. 164)“…ce of process, but by filing a notice of appeal pursuant to General Statutes § 1-206(b)(1), which provides in relevant part…”
- Clerk of the Superior Court v. Freedom of Information Commission (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2006, 278 Conn. 28)“…rt time deadlines for considering requests for records; see General Statutes § 1-206(a); [13] provides for appeals to the c…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Code of the District of Columbia, Title 2: Government Administration. - Chapter 5: Administrative Procedure. - Subchapter II: Freedom of Information.
§ 2-532Right of access to public records; allowable costs; time limits.In forcecited in 5 of our articles
(a) Any person has a right to inspect, and at his or her discretion, to copy any public record of a public body, except as otherwise expressly provided by § 2-534, in accordance with reasonable rules that shall be issued by a public body after notice and comment, concerning the time and place of access. (a-1) In making any record available to a person pursuant to this section, a public body shall provide the record in any form or format requested by the person, provided that the person shall pay the costs of reproducing the record in that form or format. (a-2) In responding to a request for records pursuant to this section, a public body shall make reasonable efforts to search for the records in electronic form or format, except when the efforts would significantly interfere with the operation of the public body’s automated information system.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at github.com
Cited in 14 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):The D.C. Court of Appeals has construed section 2-532(c) in Fraternal Order of Police litigation: its 2013 decision held a good-faith production plus Vaughn index within 15 business days is timely even if more records follow, and its 2016 decision rejected reading "reasonably describing" as a specificity screen that voids a request.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Fraternal Order of Police, Metropolitan Police Labor Committee v. The District of Columbia (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2013, 79 A.3d 347)✓The police union argued the District's later document productions were untimely; the court held section 2-532(c) is met when a public body responds in good faith within the fifteen business days, and that releasing more responsive records afterward does not breach the deadline.
- Dubose, DDS v. District of Columbia (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2023)“…ic record of a public body,” except as expressly provided. D.C. Code § 2-532(a). Agencies may charge a reasonable f…”
- FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, METROPOLITAN POLICE LABOR COMMITTEE v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2016, 139 A.3d 853)“…1 Ms. Cenatus appears to have been referring to D.C. Code § 2-532 (c) (2006 Repl.), which provides that ―…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: District of Columbia Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits, How to Get a Police Report in DC (2026): PD-10 & PD-251 Reports, DC Police Body Camera Laws: Rules & Public Access (2026)
Kansas Statutes Annotated, Chapter 45: PUBLIC RECORDS, DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION
§ 45-215Title of act.In forcecited in 6 of our articles
K.S.A. 45-215 through 45-223 shall be known and may be cited as the open records act.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ksrevisor.gov
Cited in 69 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Myers (Supreme Court of Kansas 1996, 260 Kan. 669)“…e subject to the provisions of the Kansas Open Records Act, K.S.A. 45-215 et seq. Myers asserts,…”
- Wichita Eagle & Beacon Publishing Co. v. Simmons (Supreme Court of Kansas 2002, 274 Kan. 194)“…996 through 1999, under the Kansas Open Records Act (KORA), K.S.A. 45-215 et seq. The district court…”
- Harris Enterprises, Inc. v. Moore (Supreme Court of Kansas 1987, 241 Kan. 59)“…e exempt from disclosure under the Kansas Open Records Act, K.S.A. 45-215 et seq. This case aros…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kansas Laws on Recording Police, Kansas Police Body Camera Laws: Access & K.S.A. 45-254, Kansas Public Records Laws: The Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) Explained
§ 45-218Inspection of records; request; response; refusal, when; fees.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) All public records shall be open for inspection by any person, except as otherwise provided by this act, and suitable facilities shall be made available by each public agency for this purpose. No person shall removal* original copies of public records from the office of any public agency without the written permission of the custodian of the record. (b) Upon request in accordance with procedures adopted under K.S.A. 45-220, any person may inspect public records during the regular office hours of the public agency and during any additional hours established by the public agency pursuant to K.S.A. 45-220. (c) If the person to whom the request is directed is not the custodian of the public record requested, such person shall so notify the requester and shall furnish the name and location of the custodian of the public record, if known to or readily ascertainable by such person. (d) Each request for access to a public record shall be acted upon as soon as possible, but not later than the end of the third business day following the date that the request is received.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ksrevisor.gov
Cited in 31 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Telegram Publishing Co. v. Kansas Department of Transportation (2003) held an agency's failures to respond within three business days violated K.S.A. 45-218(d). Baker v. Hayden (2021) read 45-218(a) as letting any person seek records without stating a purpose, but dismissed on standing without reaching the merits.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Baker v. Hayden (Supreme Court of Kansas 2021, 490 P.3d 1164)✓An attorney was denied audio recordings of two open court hearings and later obtained them. The court held section 45-218(a) gave him statutory standing as any person, but he lost traditional standing once he had the recordings, so it dismissed without reaching the merits.
- Telegram Publishing Co. v. Kansas Department of Transportation (Supreme Court of Kansas 2003, 275 Kan. 779)✓A newspaper made three records requests for railroad crossing hazard rankings and got late or hollow responses. The court held each response violated section 45-218(d)'s three-business-day requirement and that the agency acted in bad faith, awarding prelitigation attorney fees.
- Clark v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 287 (Court of Appeals of Kansas 2018, 55 Kan. App. 2d 402)✓A man requested a school district letter banning someone from its property, plus related policies. The court held the letter was an open record because it gave notice of regulatory action, and that missing section 45-218(d)'s three-day deadline was a violation but not bad faith.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kansas Court Records: How to Search the District Court Public Access Portal
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 61: GENERAL PROVISIONS AS TO OFFICES AND OFFICERS -- SOCIAL SECURITY FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEES -- EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM
§ 61.168Body-worn cameras and video and audio recordings -- Disclosure, retention, and availability for viewing governed by KRS 61.870 to 61.884 and 171.410 to 171.740 -- ExceptionsIn forcecited in 11 of our articles
(1) As used in this section: (a) "Body-worn camera" means a video or audio electronic recording device that is carried by or worn on the body of a public safety officer. This definition does not include a dashboard mounted camera or recording device used in the course of clandestine investigations; (b) "Body-worn camera recording" or "recording" means a video or audio recording, or both, that is made by a body-worn camera during the course of a public safety officer's official duties; (c) "Personal representative" means a court-appointed guardian, attorney, or agent possessing written authorization to act on behalf of a person that is involved in an incident contained in a body-worn camera recording, a person holding a power of attorney for a person that is involved in an incident contained in a body-worn camera recording, or the parent or guardian of a minor child depicted in a body-worn camera recording.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Nathaniel Parish v. Kaitlynn Patrice Petter (2020) addressed whether KRS 61.168 controls how a civil litigant obtains police body-worn camera video, holding that the open records processes in the body camera statutes do not supplant discovery under the Rules of Civil Procedure.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Courier Journal, Inc. v. Shively Police Department (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2022)“…9-month-old infant.” The Courier-Journal notes that while KRS 61.168(4)(g) generally gives an agency discre…”
- Nathaniel Parish v. Kaitlynn Patrice Petter (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2020)✓A man contesting a protective order subpoenaed police body camera video; the court held KRS 61.168's open records process does not supplant civil discovery, so the family court erred by refusing to apply the civil rules, though it found the error harmless.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Kentucky Police Body Camera Laws: KRS 61.168 & Access, Kentucky Public Records Laws: The Open Records Act (KRS 61.870) Explained
§ 61.870Definitions for KRS 61.870 to 61.884In forcecited in 5 of our articles
As used in KRS 61.870 to 61.884, unless the context requires otherwise: (1) "Public agency" means: (a) Every state or local government officer; (b) Every state or local government department, division, bureau, board, commission, and authority; (c) Every state or local legislative board, commission, committee, and officer; (d) Every county and city governing body, council, school district board, special district board, and municipal corporation; (e) Every state or local court or judicial agency; (f) Every state or local government agency, including the policy-making board of an institution of education, created by or pursuant to state or local statute, executive order, ordinance, resolution, or other legislative act; (g) Any body created by state or local authority in any branch of government; (h) Any body which, within any fiscal year, derives at least twenty-five percent (25%) of its funds expended by it in the Commonwealth of Kentucky from state or local authority funds.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 99 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Beckham v. Bd. of Educ. of Jefferson Cty. (Kentucky Supreme Court 1994, 873 S.W.2d 575)“…release records pursuant to the Kentucky Open Records Act, KRS 61.870, et seq., has standing to contest the…”
- Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychologists v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co. (Kentucky Supreme Court 1992, 826 S.W.2d 324)“…below have properly applied the Kentucky Open Records Act, KRS 61.870 through .884, to the essentially undisp…”
- Zink v. Commonwealth, Department of Workers' Claims, Labor Cabinet (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 1994, 902 S.W.2d 825)“…nt) provide him access under the Kentucky Open Records Act (KRS 61.870 et seq.) to certain record…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Laws on Recording Police: Your First Amendment Rights, How to Get a Police Report in Kentucky (2026 Guide)
§ 61.880Denial of inspection -- Role of Attorney GeneralIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) If a person enforces KRS 61.870 to 61.884 pursuant to this section, he or she shall begin enforcement under this subsection before proceeding to enforcement under subsection (2) of this section. Each public agency, upon any request for records made under KRS 61.870 to 61.884, shall determine within five (5) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the person making the request, within the five (5) day period, of its decision. An agency response denying, in whole or in part, inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. The response shall be issued by the official custodian or under his or her authority, and it shall constitute final agency action.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 62 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Beckham v. Bd. of Educ. of Jefferson Cty. (Kentucky Supreme Court 1994, 873 S.W.2d 575)“…of access to public documents. The remedies provided for in KRS 61.880 and 61.882 are for persons denied acces…”
- Bowling v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government (Kentucky Supreme Court 2005, 172 S.W.3d 333)“…for which it claimed a statutory exemption from disclosure. KRS 61.880(1); 61.878(4). Accordingly, Appellant’s…”
- Commonwealth, Department of Corrections v. Chestnut (Kentucky Supreme Court 2008, 250 S.W.3d 655)“…ion may appeal the decision to circuit court as provided in KRS 61.880(5) and 61.848.” 23…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Louisiana Revised Statutes
§ 44:33Availability of recordsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A.(1) When a request is made for a public record to which the public is entitled, the official, clerks of court and the custodian of notarial records in and for the parish of Orleans excepted, who has responsibility for the record shall have the record segregated from other records under his custody so that the public can reasonably view the record. (2) If, however, segregating the record would be unreasonably burdensome or expensive, or if the record requested is maintained in a fashion that makes it readily identifiable and renders further segregation unnecessary, the official shall so state in writing and shall state the location of the requested record. B.(1) If the public record applied for is immediately available, because of its not being in active use at the time of the application, the public record shall be immediately presented to the authorized person applying for it.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
Cited in 25 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- VANDENWEGHE v. Parish of Jefferson (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2011, 11 La.App. 5 Cir. 52)“…557 So.2d 714, 717 (La.App. 4 Cir.1990), citing La.R.S. 44:33(A)(1). La.R.S. 44:33(A)(1) provi…”
- Nungesser v. Brown (Louisiana Court of Appeal 1995, 95 La.App. 1 Cir. 1039)“…tive use and specifies a time for access within three days. La.R.S. 44:33(B). When a request is made, the custodi…”
- Emily Washington v. Leon Cannizzaro (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2021)“…custody so that the public can reasonably view the record.” La. R.S. 44:33(A)(1). Custodians have an additional re…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Louisiana Public Records Law: Deadlines, Fees, and How to File a Request
Michigan Compiled Laws
§ 15.231Short title; public policyIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
(1) This act shall be known and may be cited as the "freedom of information act". (2) It is the public policy of this state that all persons, except those persons incarcerated in state or local correctional facilities, are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and public employees, consistent with this act. The people shall be informed so that they may fully participate in the democratic process.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 386 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Booth Newspapers, Inc v. University of Michigan Board of Regents (Michigan Supreme Court 1993, 444 Mich. 211)“…SA 4.1800(11) et seq., or the Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231 et seq.; MSA 4.1801(1) et seq. We…”
- Herald Co. v. City of Bay City (Michigan Supreme Court 2000, 463 Mich. 111)“…that they may fully participate in the democratic process. [MCL 15.231(2); MSA 4.1801(1)(2) (emphasis added).]…”
- Coblentz v. City of Novi (Michigan Supreme Court 2006, 475 Mich. 558)“…m disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq. We address also whether it was…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Michigan Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Legal Limits (2026), Michigan Data Privacy Laws: Consumer Rights & Protections (2026), Michigan Freedom of Information Act: 5 Business Days, Fees, and How to Appeal
§ 15.232DefinitionsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
As used in this act: (a) "Cybersecurity assessment" means an investigation undertaken by a person, governmental body, or other entity to identify vulnerabilities in cybersecurity plans. (b) "Cybersecurity incident" includes, but is not limited to, a computer network intrusion or attempted intrusion; a breach of primary computer network controls; unauthorized access to programs, data, or information contained in a computer system; or actions by a third party that materially affect component performance or, because of impact to component systems, prevent normal computer system activities. (c) "Cybersecurity plan" includes, but is not limited to, information about a person's information systems, network security, encryption, network mapping, access control, passwords, authentication practices, computer hardware or software, or response to cybersecurity incidents. (d) "Cybersecurity vulnerability" means a deficiency within computer hardware or software, or within a computer network or information system, that could be exploited by unauthorized parties for use against an individual computer user or a computer network or information system.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 103 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bradley v. Saranac Community Schools Board of Education (Michigan Supreme Court 1997, 455 Mich. 285)“…[12] "Public body" means: "A ... school district...." MCL 15.232(b)(iii); MSA 4.1801(b)(iii). [13] "P…”
- Swickard v. Wayne County Medical Examiner (Michigan Supreme Court 1991, 438 Mich. 536)“…board, department, commission, council, or agency thereof. [MCL 15.232(b)(iii); MSA 4.1801(2)(b)(iii).]…”
- Walen v. Department of Corrections (Michigan Supreme Court 1993, 443 Mich. 240)“…3(1); MSA 4.1801(3)(1) requires a "public body," defined in MCL 15.232(b); MSA 4.1801(2)(b), to permit a perso…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 15.235Request to inspect or receive copy of public record; response to request; failure to respond; damages; contents of notice denying request; signing notice of denial; notice extending period of response; action by requesting person; law enforcement records management system; alternate responsesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Except as provided in section 3, a person desiring to inspect or receive a copy of a public record shall make a written request for the public record to the FOIA coordinator of a public body. A written request made by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic transmission is not received by a public body's FOIA coordinator until 1 business day after the electronic transmission is made. However, if a written request is sent by electronic mail and delivered to the public body's spam or junk-mail folder, the request is not received until 1 day after the public body first becomes aware of the written request. The public body shall note in its records both the time a written request is delivered to its spam or junk-mail folder and the time the public body first becomes aware of that request. (2) Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the person making the request, a public body shall, subject to subsection (10), respond to a request for a public record within 5 business days after the public body receives the request by doing 1 of the following: (a) Granting the request. (b) Issuing a written notice to the requesting person denying the request.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 70 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Federated Publications, Inc v. City of Lansing (Michigan Supreme Court 2002, 467 Mich. 98)“…the public body] for the public record . . . .”1 MCL 15.235(1). After receiving a FOIA request,…”
- Walen v. Department of Corrections (Michigan Supreme Court 1993, 443 Mich. 240)“…252 descriptive, the prisoner's request should be denied. MCL 15.235; MSA 4.1801(5). IV The Court of App…”
- King v. Michigan State Police Department (Michigan Court of Appeals 2013, 303 Mich. App. 162)“…to a request for a public record within five business days. MCL 15.235(2). The public body’s response must gra…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 15.240Options by requesting person; appeal; actions by public body; receipt of written appeal; judicial review; civil action; venue; de novo proceeding; burden of proof; private view of public record; contempt; assignment of action or appeal for hearing, trial, or argument; attorneys' fees, costs, and disbursements; assessment of award; damagesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) If a public body makes a final determination to deny all or a portion of a request, the requesting person may do 1 of the following at his or her option: (a) Submit to the head of the public body a written appeal that specifically states the word "appeal" and identifies the reason or reasons for reversal of the denial. (b) Commence a civil action in the circuit court, or if the decision of a state public body is at issue, the court of claims, to compel the public body's disclosure of the public records within 180 days after a public body's final determination to deny a request. (2) Within 10 business days after receiving a written appeal pursuant to subsection (1)(a), the head of a public body shall do 1 of the following: (a) Reverse the disclosure denial. (b) Issue a written notice to the requesting person upholding the disclosure denial. (c) Reverse the disclosure denial in part and issue a written notice to the requesting person upholding the disclosure denial in part. (d) Under unusual circumstances, issue a notice extending for not more than 10 business days the period during which the head of the public body shall respond to the written appeal.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 174 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Coblentz v. City of Novi (Michigan Supreme Court 2006, 475 Mich. 558)“…ncy bears the burden of proving that an exemption applies. MCL 15.240(4). In this case, defendant did…”
- Herald Co. v. Eastern Michigan University Board of Regents (Michigan Supreme Court 2006, 475 Mich. 463)“…the burden to prove that its denial comports with the law. MCL 15.240(4). In this case, defendant is the go…”
- Federated Publications, Inc v. City of Lansing (Michigan Supreme Court 2002, 467 Mich. 98)“…clearly erroneous standard. Second, we hold that MCL 15.240(4) of the FOIA specifically places th…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13: GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES
§ 13.03ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATAIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Subdivision 1. Public data. All government data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated by a government entity shall be public unless classified by statute, or temporary classification pursuant to section 13.06, or federal law, as nonpublic or protected nonpublic, or with respect to data on individuals, as private or confidential. The responsible authority in every government entity shall keep records containing government data in such an arrangement and condition as to make them easily accessible for convenient use. Photographic, photostatic, microphotographic, or microfilmed records shall be considered as accessible for convenient use regardless of the size of such records. Subd. 2. Procedures. (a) The responsible authority in every government entity shall establish procedures, consistent with this chapter, to insure that requests for government data are received and complied with in an appropriate and prompt manner.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mn.gov
Cited in 64 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Demers v. City of Minneapolis (1991) held under subdivision 1 that complainant identities on closed police internal affairs files are public government data, since all government data is public unless another law classifies it otherwise. KSTP-TV v. Ramsey County (2011) held section 13.37 made sealed absentee ballots not public.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Doe v. Minnesota State Board of Medical Examiners (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1989, 435 N.W.2d 45)✓A psychiatrist sued to keep the medical board's public decision from discussing complaints the board had dismissed. Reading section 13.03's public-data rule with subdivision 4, the court held the dismissed charges could not be part of the decision and were not public data.
- Annandale Advocate v. City of Annandale (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1989, 435 N.W.2d 24)✓A newspaper sought the investigative report behind the police chief's discharge. Applying section 13.03, subdivision 1 alongside the private personnel-data rule, the court held the report private and that subdivision 4 did not reclassify it when discussed at a council meeting.
- Demers v. City of Minneapolis (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1991, 468 N.W.2d 71)✓A graduate student asked for ten years of Minneapolis police internal affairs complaint forms. The court held complainants' identities on closed files are public data, and that section 13.03, subdivision 3 bars charging for inspection or separating public from not public data.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Minnesota Government Data Practices Act: Access, Fees, and Body Camera Rules
Revised Statutes of Missouri, Title XXXIX (CONDUCT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS), Chapter 610
§ 610.023Records of governmental bodies to be in care of custodian, duties — records may be copied but not removed, exception, procedure — denial of access, procedure.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
1. Each public governmental body is to appoint a custodian who is to be responsible for the maintenance of that body's records. The identity and location of a public governmental body's custodian is to be made available upon request. 2. Each public governmental body shall make available for inspection and copying by the public of that body's public records. No person shall remove original public records from the office of a public governmental body or its custodian without written permission of the designated custodian. No public governmental body shall, after August 28, 1998, grant to any person or entity, whether by contract, license or otherwise, the exclusive right to access and disseminate any public record unless the granting of such right is necessary to facilitate coordination with, or uniformity among, industry regulators having similar authority.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-03 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Anderson v. Village of Jacksonville (2003) held Section 610.023.3's three business day clock is not triggered until the records custodian receives the request, so a letter to the entity's attorney stated no claim. Deaton v. Kidd (1996) affirmed a purposeful violation where an official released the statutes tape only to the top bidder.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Opinion No. (1991) (Missouri Attorney General Reports 1991)✓Asked whether property record cards kept by county assessors are public, the Missouri Attorney General concluded that an assessor's office is a public governmental body and that the cards must be made available for inspection and copying under section 610.023.
- Anderson v. Village of Jacksonville (Missouri Court of Appeals 2003, 103 S.W.3d 190)✓A business owner's lawyer sent a records request for proof of the village's property ownership to the village attorney, not the records custodian. The court held the three-business-day response clock starts only when the custodian receives the request, so the petition failed.
- Deaton v. Kidd (Missouri Court of Appeals 1996, 932 S.W.2d 804)✓The Revisor of Statutes released the computer tape of the Missouri statutes only to private companies that bid for exclusive access, refusing a requester a copy. The court held the tape was a public record and that limiting access by bidding violated section 610.023.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri Sunshine Law: Three Business Days, Fees, and Police Video Rules, Are Autopsy Reports Public in Missouri? (2026 Guide)
Montana Code Annotated, Title 2
§ 2-6-1006Public Information Requests -- FeesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
2-6-1006. (Temporary) Public information requests -- fees. (1) (a) A person may request public information from a public agency. A public agency shall make the means of requesting public information accessible to all persons. (b) (i) All public agencies are governed by this subsection (1). (ii) A public agency that is not an executive branch agency must meet the requirements of subsection (2) when responding to a public information request. (iii) Except as provided in subsection (1)(b)(iv), all executive branch agencies must meet the requirements of subsection (3) when responding to a public information request. (iv) The secretary of state must meet the requirements of subsection (4) regarding fees. (c) A public agency other than the office of the secretary of state may charge a fee pursuant to subsections (1)(e) and (5) and this subsection (1)(c). The fee must be documented. The public agency may require the requesting person to pay the estimated fee prior to identifying and gathering the requested public information. (d) A public agency is not required to alter or customize public information to provide it in a form specified to meet the needs of the requesting person.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Gerdes v. Niemann (District Court, D. Montana 2024)“…information cannot be readily identified and gathered[].]” Mont. Code Ann. § 2-6-1006(2)(a). Public information means “inform…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Montana Right to Know: Public Records Deadlines, Fees, and How to Sue
Nebraska Revised Statutes, Chapter 84: STATE OFFICERS
§ 84-712Public records; free examination; memorandum and abstracts; copies; feesIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, all residents of this state and all other persons interested in the examination of the public records as defined in section 84-712.01 are hereby fully empowered and authorized to (a) examine such records, and make memoranda, copies using their own copying or photocopying equipment in accordance with subsection (2) of this section, and abstracts therefrom, all free of charge, during the hours the respective offices may be kept open for the ordinary transaction of business and (b) except if federal copyright law otherwise provides, obtain copies of public records in accordance with subsection (3) of this section during the hours the respective offices may be kept open for the ordinary transaction of business. (2) Copies made by residents or other persons using their own copying or photocopying equipment pursuant to subdivision (1)(a) of this section shall be made on the premises of the custodian of the public record or at a location mutually agreed to by the requester and the custodian. (3)(a) Copies may be obtained pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of this section only if the custodian has copying equipment reasonably available.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nebraskalegislature.gov
Cited in 43 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State ex rel. BH Media Group v. Frakes (2020) held the execution team confidentiality statute is an "other statute" under section 84-712(1) but only a narrow exemption, with the burden on the agency. Nebraska Journalism Trust v. Dept. of Envt. & Energy (2024) read section 84-712(3) to allow fees for nonattorney review past four hours.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State ex rel. BH Media Group v. Frakes (Nebraska Supreme Court 2020, 943 N.W.2d 231)✓News organizations sought corrections records on lethal injection drug purchases. The court held the execution team confidentiality statute is an exemption, not a complete exception to section 84-712, and that the director failed to prove it justified withholding the records.
- Nebraska Journalism Trust v. Dept. of Envt. & Energy (Nebraska Supreme Court 2024, 316 Neb. 174)✓A nonprofit newsroom challenged a $44,000 fee estimate for keyword email searches. The court held section 84-712 lets an agency charge for nonattorney staff time beyond four cumulative hours spent reviewing records for a statutory basis to withhold, and vacated the writ.
- Jacob v. Nebraska Bd. of Parole (Nebraska Supreme Court 2022, 313 Neb. 109)✓An inmate sought the record of his first-step parole review. The court held the interview record could be withheld as an examination record, and that the statute making parole files confidential is an "other statute" under section 84-712(1), so those files are not public records.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nebraska Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits (2026), Nebraska Police Body Camera Laws: Retention & Records, Nebraska Public Records Law: How to Request Government Records (2026)
New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated, TITLE VI PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, CHAPTER 91-A ACCESS TO GOVERNMENTAL RECORDS AND MEETINGS
§ 91-A:7Violation.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
I. Any person aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may petition the superior court for injunctive relief. In order to satisfy the purposes of this chapter, the courts shall give proceedings under this chapter high priority on the court calendar. Such a petitioner may appear with or without counsel. The petition shall be deemed sufficient if it states facts constituting a violation of this chapter, and may be filed by the petitioner or his or her counsel with the clerk of court. II. In lieu of the procedure under paragraph I, an aggrieved person may file a complaint with the ombudsman under RSA 91-A:7-a and in accordance with RSA 91-A:7-b. III. A person's decision to petition the superior court forecloses the ability to file a complaint with the ombudsman pursuant to RSA 91-A:7-b. IV. A person's decision to file a complaint with the ombudsman forecloses the ability to petition the superior court until the ombudsman issues a final ruling or the deadline for such a ruling has passed.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at gc.nh.gov
Cited in 16 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lisa Censabella v. Hillsborough County Attorney (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 2018, 197 A.3d 74)“…erred in ruling that she was not a “person aggrieved” under RSA 91-A:7 (2013) and, therefore, lacked standing…”
- Samuel Provenza v. Town of Canaan (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 2022)“…d that, because Provenza was not a “person aggrieved” under RSA 91-A:7 (Supp. 2021), he did not have standing…”
- Herron v. Northwood (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 1971, 111 N.H. 324)“…wood, New Hampshire, petitioned for injunctive relief under RSA 91-A:7 to enjoin the town from holding a close…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law: Records Requests (2026)
Ohio Revised Code
§ 149.43Availability of public records for inspection and copyingIn forcecited in 12 of our articles
(A) As used in this section: (1) "Public record" means records kept by any public office, including, but not limited to, state, county, city, village, township, and school district units, and records pertaining to the delivery of educational services by an alternative school in this state kept by…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at codes.ohio.gov
Also relied on in: Ohio Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence, Ohio Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limitations, Ohio Death Records: Are They Public + How to Get Them
§ 2743.75Jurisdiction over claims alleging denial of access to public recordsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(A) In order to provide for an expeditious and economical procedure that attempts to resolve disputes alleging a denial of access to public records in violation of division (B) of section 149.43 of the Revised Code, except for a court that hears a mandamus action pursuant to that section, upon the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at codes.ohio.gov
Cited in 399 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Welsh-Huggins v. Jefferson Cty. Prosecutor's Office (Slip Opinion) (Ohio Supreme Court 2020, 163 Ohio St. 3d 337)“…nder R.C. 149.433(B)(1). In proceedings brought pursuant to R.C. 2743.75, the Court of Claims determined that co…”
- Hurt v. Liberty Twp. (Ohio Court of Appeals 2017, 97 N.E.3d 1153)“…6, Requesters filed a complaint against the Township under R.C. 2743.75 alleging denial of access to a public r…”
- Viola v. Cuyahoga Cty. Pros. Office (Ohio Court of Appeals 2021, 2021 Ohio 4210)“…urt of Claims dismissing his complaint, brought pursuant to R.C. 2743.75, alleging a denial of access to public…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Ohio Public Records Act: Requests and Court of Claims Appeals (2026), Ohio Rev. Code § 149.43 Explained: Public Records Act
Utah Code, Title 63G: General Government
§ 63G-2-204Record request -- Response -- Time for responding.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) (a) A person making a request for a record shall submit to the governmental entity that retains the record a written request containing: (i) the person's: (A) name; (B) mailing address; (C) email address, if the person has an email address and is willing to accept communications by email relating to the person's records request; and (D) daytime telephone number; and (ii) a description of the record requested that identifies the record with reasonable specificity. (b) (i) A single record request may not be submitted to multiple governmental entities. (ii) Subsection (1)(b)(i) may not be construed to prevent a person from submitting a separate record request to each of multiple governmental entities, even if each of the separate requests seeks access to the same record. (2) (a) In response to a request for a record, a governmental entity may not provide a record that it has received under Section 63G-2-206 as a shared record.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- McKitrick v. Gibson (Utah Supreme Court 2021, 496 P.3d 147)“…RAMA begins with a record request to a governmental entity. UTAH CODE § 63G-2-204(1)(a). Here, McKitrick requested the in…”
- Salt Lake City Corporation v. Haik (Court of Appeals of Utah 2014, 767 Utah Adv. Rep. 9)“…hen a governmental entity shall respond to a GRAMA request. Utah Code Ann. § 63G-2-204 (LexisNexis 2011). 4. The Board determ…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Utah GRAMA Requests: How to Get Government Records in Utah
§ 63G-2-403Appeals to the director of the Government Records Office.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) (a) A records appellant appeals to the director by filing a notice of appeal with the director no later than 30 days after the day on which the decision being appealed is issued. (b) Notwithstanding Subsection (1)(a), a requester may file a notice of appeal with the director no later than 45 days after the day on which the record request is made if: (i) the circumstances described in Subsection 63G-2-401(1)(b) occur; and (ii) the chief administrative officer fails to make a decision under Section 63G-2-401. (c) The time for a requester to file a notice of appeal under Subsection (1)(a) or (b) is suspended for the period of time that: (i) begins on the date the requester submits a request under Section 63A-12-204 for the government records ombudsman to mediate the dispute between the requester and the governmental entity; and (ii) ends the earlier of the following dates: (A) the date that the government records ombudsman certifies in writing that the mediation is concluded; or (B) the date that the government records ombudsman certifies in writing that the mediation did not occur or was not concluded because of a lack of the required consent.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res. (Utah Supreme Court 2018, 435 P.3d 179)“…the records committee’s decision to [the] district court.” UTAH CODE § 63G-2-403(12)(c) (2010) (emphasis added). ¶44…”
- Salt Lake City Corporation v. Haik (Court of Appeals of Utah 2014, 767 Utah Adv. Rep. 9)“…ict Court pursuant to Salt Lake City Code § 2.64.140(G) and Utah Code Ann. § 63G-2-403 . . . .”5 ¶4 The City subsequently…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Code of Virginia, Title 2.2: Administration of Government
§ 2.2-3704Public records to be open to inspection; procedure for requesting records and responding to request; charges; transfer of records for storage, etcIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, all public records shall be open to citizens of the Commonwealth, representatives of newspapers and magazines with circulation in the Commonwealth, and representatives of radio and television stations broadcasting in or into the Commonwealth during the regular office hours of the custodian of such records. Access to such records shall be provided by the custodian in accordance with this chapter by inspection or by providing copies of the requested records, at the option of the requester. The custodian may require the requester to provide his name and legal address. The custodian of such records shall take all necessary precautions for their preservation and safekeeping. B. A request for public records shall identify the requested records with reasonable specificity. The request need not make reference to this chapter in order to invoke the provisions of this chapter or to impose the time limits for response by a public body.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 7 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Mark McBurney v. Nathaniel Young (2012) affirmed judgment upholding VFOIA's citizens-only access rule in Va. Code 2.2-3704(A) against Privileges and Immunities and dormant Commerce Clause challenges, affirming McBurney v. Cuccinelli (2011), which found no fundamental right of noncitizen access to state records.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Va. Educ. Ass'n v. Commonwealth (Supreme Court of Virginia 2017, 803 S.E.2d 320)✓A requester sought student growth percentile data identifying teachers; the court reversed an order directing production under section 2.2-3704(G) with exempt fields excised, holding the data confidential teacher performance indicators under Code 22.1-295.1(C).
- Va. Education Assn. v. Davison (Corrected) (Supreme Court of Virginia 2017)“…t fields of information in accordance with law pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3704(G).” The circuit court also awarded Dav…”
- Mark McBurney v. Nathaniel Young (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2012)✓A Rhode Island man and a California records vendor were refused Virginia FOIA requests as noncitizens; the Fourth Circuit affirmed, holding section 2.2-3704(A)'s citizens-only rule violated neither the Privileges and Immunities Clause nor the dormant Commerce Clause.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Virginia Freedom of Information Act: Who Can Request and How (2026)
§ 2.2-3713Proceedings for enforcement of chapterIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. Any person, including the attorney for the Commonwealth acting in his official or individual capacity, denied the rights and privileges conferred by this chapter may proceed to enforce such rights and privileges by filing a petition for mandamus or injunction, supported by an affidavit showing good cause. Such petition may be brought in the name of the person notwithstanding that a request for public records was made by the person's attorney in his representative capacity. Venue for the petition shall be addressed as follows: 1. In a case involving a local public body, to the general district court or circuit court of the county or city from which the public body has been elected or appointed to serve and in which such rights and privileges were so denied; 2. In a case involving a regional public body, to the general district or circuit court of the county or city where the principal business office of such body is located; and 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Virginia State Conference NAACP v. Governor Glenn A. Youngkin (Court of Appeals of Virginia 2025)“…r reasonable attorney fees and costs under Va. Code § 2.2-3713(D);[1] and E. Provide…”
- National Public Radio v. Virginia Department of Corrections (Court of Appeals of Virginia 2025)“…to an asserted statutory exemption to VFOIA, Va. Code § 2.2-3713(E), the Circuit Court erred by denying…”
- McBurney v. Cuccinelli (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2010, 616 F.3d 393)“…ion against a state official for a violation of the Act, 4 Va.Code Ann. § 2.2-3713(A), as used throughout the Code, the te…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Vermont Statutes Annotated, Title 1: General Provisions, Chapter 5: Common Law; General Rights, Subchapter: ACCESS TO PUBLIC RECORDS
§ 319EnforcementIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) Any person aggrieved by the denial of a request for public records under this subchapter may apply to the Civil Division of the Superior Court in the county in which the complainant resides, or has his or her personal place of business, or in which the public records are situated, or in the Civil Division of the Superior Court of Washington County, to enjoin the public agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant. In such a case, the court shall determine the matter de novo, and may examine the contents of such agency records in camera to determine whether such records or any part thereof shall be withheld under any of the exemptions set forth in section 317 of this title, and the burden of proof shall be on the public agency to sustain its action. (b) Except as to cases the court considers of greater importance, proceedings before the Civil Division of the Superior Court, as authorized by this section, and appeals there from, take precedence on the docket over all cases and shall be assigned for hearing and trial or for argument at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-01 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.vermont.gov
Cited in 50 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Trombley v. Bellows Falls Union High School District No. 27 (Supreme Court of Vermont 1993, 160 Vt. 101)“…l court, the burden is on the agency to sustain its action. 1 V.S.A. § 319(a). In relying on an exception to discl…”
- Rutland Herald v. City of Rutland and AFSCME Council 93, Local 1201 (Supreme Court of Vermont 2012, 191 Vt. 387)“…159 Vt. 431, 438 , 623 A.2d 979, 983 (1992); see also 1 V.S.A. § 319(a) (agency bears burden of justifying i…”
- Energy Policy Advocates v. Attorney General's Office (Supreme Court of Vermont 2023, 2023 VT 43)“…arguing that it had substantially prevailed under the PRA, 1 V.S.A. § 319(d)(1). The trial court partially grante…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Vermont Public Records Act: How to Request Records (2026)
Revised Code of Washington
§ 42.56.080Identifiable records—Facilities for copying—Availability of public records.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1)(a) A public records request must be for identifiable records. A request for all or substantially all records prepared, owned, used, or retained by an agency is not a valid request for identifiable records under this chapter, provided that a request for all records regarding a particular topic or containing a particular keyword or name shall not be considered a request for all of an agency's records. (b) A request for a recording required to be maintained by a school district board of directors under RCW 42.30.035(2) shall only be considered a valid request for an identifiable record when the date of the recording, or a range of dates, is specified in the request. When searching for and providing identifiable recordings, no search criteria except date must be considered by the school district. (2) Public records shall be available for inspection and copying, and agencies shall, upon request for identifiable public records, make them promptly available to any person including, if applicable, on a partial or installment basis as records that are part of a larger set of requested records are assembled or made ready for inspection or disclosure.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 79 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Livingston v. Cedeno (Washington Supreme Court 2008, 164 Wash. 2d 46)“…g persons requesting records.” Former RCW 42.17.270 (1987); RCW 42.56.080. ¶11 The primary objective of the cor…”
- SEIU Healthcare 775NW v. Department of Social & Health Services (Court of Appeals of Washington 2016, 193 Wash. App. 377)“…but it provides an express exception for RCW 42.56.070(9). RCW 42.56.080 states: Agencies shall not distinguis…”
- DeLong v. Parmelee (Court of Appeals of Washington 2010, 157 Wash. App. 119)“…unless the record falls within certain specific exemptions. RCW 42.56.080; Livingston, 164 Wn.2d at 50 . And…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Public Records Act: Requests, Fees, and Body Camera Video (2026)
§ 42.56.240Investigative, law enforcement, and crime victims.In forcecited in 12 of our articles
The following investigative, law enforcement, and crime victim information is exempt from public inspection and copying under this chapter: (1) Specific intelligence information and specific investigative records compiled by investigative, law enforcement, and penology agencies, and state agencies vested with the responsibility to discipline members of any profession, the nondisclosure of which is essential to effective law enforcement or for the protection of any person's right to privacy; (2) Information revealing the identity of persons who are witnesses to or victims of crime or who file complaints with investigative, law enforcement, or penology agencies, other than the commission, if disclosure would endanger any person's life, physical safety, or property. If at the time a complaint is filed the complainant, victim, or witness indicates a desire for disclosure or nondisclosure, such desire shall govern.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 81 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Sargent v. Seattle Police Dept. (2013) held the effective law enforcement exemption in RCW 42.56.240(1) is not categorical once a case goes to a prosecutor, nor for internal investigation files; the agency must justify each withheld record. Bainbridge Island Police Guild v. City of Puyallup (2011) exempted only an officer's identity.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bainbridge Island Police Guild v. City of Puyallup (Washington Supreme Court 2011, 172 Wash. 2d 398)✓Police reports on an unsubstantiated sexual misconduct claim against an officer were withheld in full; the court held Section 42.56.240(1) exempts only the officer's identity, since its privacy analysis is the same, and ordered the rest produced with his name redacted.
- BAINBRIDGE POLICE GUILD v. City of Puyallup (Washington Supreme Court 2011, 259 P.3d 190)✓Police reports on an unsubstantiated sexual misconduct claim against an officer were withheld in full; the court held Section 42.56.240(1) exempts only the officer's identity, since its privacy analysis is the same, and ordered the rest produced with his name redacted.
- Sargent v. Seattle Police Dept. (Washington Supreme Court 2013, 179 Wash. 2d 376)✓Seattle police withheld criminal and internal affairs files from a man arrested after a scuffle with an off-duty officer; the court held Section 42.56.240(1) stops applying categorically once a case reaches a prosecutor and never applies categorically to internal investigations.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Legal Limits (2026), Washington Police Body Camera Laws: Mandate & Access, Are 911 Calls Public Records? State Access Guide (2026)
§ 42.56.520Prompt responses required.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Responses to requests for public records shall be made promptly by agencies, the office of the secretary of the senate, and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives. Within five business days of receiving a public record request, an agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives must respond in one of the ways provided in this subsection (1): (a) Providing the record; (b) Providing an internet address and link on the agency's website to the specific records requested, except that if the requester notifies the agency that he or she cannot access the records through the internet, then the agency must provide copies of the record or allow the requester to view copies using an agency computer; (c) Acknowledging that the agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives has received the request and providing a reasonable estimate of the time the agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives will require to respond to the request; (d) Acknowledging that the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 105 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Soter v. Cowles Publishing Co. (Washington Supreme Court 2007, 162 Wash. 2d 716)“…spond to public records requests within five business days. RCW 42.56.520 (formerly RCW 42.17.320). The agency mu…”
- Soter v. Cowles Pub. Co. (Washington Supreme Court 2007, 174 P.3d 60)“…spond to public records requests within five business days. RCW 42.56.520 (formerly RCW 42.17.320). The agency mu…”
- RENTAL HOUSING ASS'N v. City of Des Moines (Washington Supreme Court 2009, 199 P.3d 393)“…determine exactly when a claim of exemption occurs. ¶ 40 RCW 42.56.520 outlines the three options an agency ha…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 42.56.550Judicial review of agency actions.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Upon the motion of any person having been denied an opportunity to inspect or copy a public record by an agency, the superior court in the county in which a record is maintained may require the responsible agency to show cause why it has refused to allow inspection or copying of a specific public record or class of records. The burden of proof shall be on the agency to establish that refusal to permit public inspection and copying is in accordance with a statute that exempts or prohibits disclosure in whole or in part of specific information or records. (2) Upon the motion of any person who believes that an agency has not made a reasonable estimate of the time that the agency requires to respond to a public record request or a reasonable estimate of the charges to produce copies of public records, the superior court in the county in which a record is maintained may require the responsible agency to show that the estimate it provided is reasonable. The burden of proof shall be on the agency to show that the estimate it provided is reasonable. (3) Judicial review of all agency actions taken or challenged under RCW 42.56.030 through 42.56.520 shall be de novo.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 364 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE OF SPOKANE v. Spokane (Washington Supreme Court 2011, 172 Wash. 2d 702)“…specific exemption applies in its response to the request. RCW 42.56.550(1); Sanders v. State, 169 Wash.2d 8…”
- Sanders v. State (Washington Supreme Court 2010, 169 Wash. 2d 827)“…lic record request” to costs and reasonable attorney fees. RCW 42.56.550(4) 10 (emphasis added). The “brief exp…”
- West v. Thurston County (Court of Appeals of Washington 2012, 168 Wash. App. 162)“…der to show cause why the public agency refused disclosure. RCW 42.56.550(1). ¶35 The PRA requires the age…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
West Virginia Code
§ 29B-1-1Declaration of policy.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
Pursuant to the fundamental philosophy of the American Constitutional form of representative government which holds to the principle that government is the servant of the people, and not the master of them, it is hereby declared to be the public policy of the State of West Virginia that all persons are, unless otherwise expressly provided by law, entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and employees. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments of government they have created. To that end, the provisions of this article shall be liberally construed with the view of carrying out the above declaration of public policy.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at code.wvlegislature.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Brothers Construction Company of Ohio, Incorporated, United States of America v. Tri-State Asphalt Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2000, 219 F.3d 300)“…irginia Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), see W. Va. Code § 29B-1-1 to -7 (Michie 1998), and obtained an au…”
- Better Government Bureau, Inc. v. McGraw (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 1997, 106 F.3d 582)“…General under the West Virginia Freedom of Information Act, W. Va.Code §§ 29B-1-1 to 29B-1-7. The Attorney General assert…”
- United States v. Brothers Const (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2000)“…er the West Virginia Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), see W. Va. Code§ 29B-1-1 to -7 (Michie 1998), and obtained an au…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: West Virginia Police Body Camera Laws: FOIA & Public Access, West Virginia Freedom of Information Act: Requests and Fees (2026)
United States Code Title 5
§ 552Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedingsIn forcecited in 36 of our articles
Each agency shall make available to the public information as follows: Each agency shall separately state and currently publish in the Federal Register for the guidance of the public— descriptions of its central and field organization and the established places at which, the employees (and in the case of a uniformed service, the members) from whom, and the methods whereby, the public may obtain information, make submittals or requests, or obtain decisions; statements of the general course and method by which its functions are channeled and determined, including the nature and requirements of all formal and informal procedures available; rules of procedure, descriptions of forms available or the places at which forms may be obtained, and instructions as to the scope and contents of all papers, reports, or examinations; substantive rules of general applicability adopted as authorized by law, and statements of general policy or interpretations of general applicability formulated and adopted by the agency; and each amendment, revision, or repeal of the foregoing.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 11,434 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (1989) held categorically that releasing a private citizen's FBI rap sheet to a third party is an unwarranted privacy invasion under Exemption 7(C). Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. (1980) applied Exemption 3, 552(b)(3).
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society (Supreme Court of the United States 1975, 421 U.S. 240)“…Pub. L. 93-502, § 1 (b) (2), 88 Stat. 1561 (amending 5 U. S. C. § 552 (a)); Packers and Stockyards Act, 42…”
- Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1980, 447 U.S. 102)✓Consumer groups filed FOIA requests for accident reports manufacturers had given the CPSC as confidential; the Court held that the Consumer Product Safety Act's section 6(b)(1) applies to FOIA requests and that its standards fall within Exemption 3, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3).
- Taylor v. Sturgell (Supreme Court of the United States 2008, 553 U.S. 880)✓An aircraft enthusiast made a FOIA request for FAA records after a friend's identical suit failed; the Court disapproved preclusion by 'virtual representation' and read § 552(a)(3)(A) as directing agencies to release records to the requesting person, not the public at large.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How to File a FOIA Request (Step by Step, 2026), Wyoming Public Records Act: Deadlines, Fees, and Appeals (2026), Wisconsin Public Records Law: No Fixed Deadline, Real Penalties (2026)
Explore the law
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13: GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES § 13.001 · Iowa Code, Chapter 22: EXAMINATION OF PUBLIC RECORDS § 22.1 (Definitions.)
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 (full statutory text, Office of the Law Revision Counsel)(uscode.house.gov).gov
- FOIA.gov, Frequently Asked Questions (nine exemptions, fees, fee waivers, agency-by-agency processing)(foia.gov).gov
- FOIA.gov, government-wide FOIA data and annual report tool(foia.gov).gov
- U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Information Policy (Summary of Fiscal Year 2025 Annual FOIA Reports)(justice.gov).gov
- Office of Government Information Services, the federal FOIA Ombudsman(archives.gov).gov
- FBI, Requesting FBI Records (eFOIPA portal and Form DOJ-361)(fbi.gov).gov
- USCIS, Request Records Through the Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act (online-only filing as of January 22, 2026)(uscis.gov).gov
- California Public Records Act, Cal. Gov. Code 7920.000 et seq.(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- Texas Public Information Act, Tex. Govt Code ch. 552 (including 552.221 and 552.301)(statutes.capitol.texas.gov).gov
- Virginia Freedom of Information Act, Va. Code 2.2-3704 (citizens of the Commonwealth; five working days)(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov
- Kentucky Open Records Act, KRS 61.870 to 61.884 (resident-only right of inspection)(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- Tennessee Comptroller, Office of Open Records Counsel Model Public Records Policy (Tenn. Code Ann. 10-7-503)(comptroller.tn.gov).gov
- Connecticut Freedom of Information Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. ch. 14 (FOI Commission appeals under 1-206)(cga.ct.gov).gov
- Illinois Attorney General, Guide to the Public Access Counselor (binding opinions under 5 ILCS 140/9.5)(illinoisattorneygeneral.gov).gov
- Pennsylvania Office of Open Records (Right-to-Know Law appeals)(openrecords.pa.gov).gov
- Idaho Public Records Act, Idaho Code ch. 74-1 (Idaho Legislature chapter index; resident and non-resident response times at 74-103)(legislature.idaho.gov).gov
- New Jersey Government Records Council, Open Public Records Act as amended by P.L. 2024, c.16 (effective September 3, 2024)(nj.gov).gov
- South Carolina Freedom of Information Act, S.C. Code Ann. 30-4-10 et seq.(scstatehouse.gov).gov
- District of Columbia FOIA, D.C. Code 2-532 (25-day body-worn camera deadline)(code.dccouncil.gov).gov
- Washington Public Records Act, RCW 42.56 (including 42.56.080, 42.56.120 and 42.56.240(14))(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code ch. 22, Examination of Public Records (22.8(4) delay safe harbor)(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- North Dakota Open Records Law, N.D. Cent. Code ch. 44-04(ndlegis.gov).gov
- Ohio Public Records Act, Ohio Rev. Code 149.43(codes.ohio.gov).gov
- Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 13 (including 13.825 on portable recording systems)(revisor.mn.gov).gov
- Arkansas Freedom of Information Handbook, 21st Edition, Arkansas Attorney General (reprints A.C.A. 25-19-101 to 25-19-112, including the 25-19-112 law enforcement media fees)(media.ark.org).gov
- Pennsylvania Right-to-Know Law, Act 3 of 2008, full text (sections 901, 902 and 1101)(legis.state.pa.us).gov
- Montana Code Annotated 2-6-1006, public information requests and fees (version effective July 1, 2026)(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Alaska Statutes AS 40.25.100 to 40.25.295, Public Records (Alaska State Legislature print view)(akleg.gov).gov
- The Alaska Public Records Act: deadlines, appeals and fees, Alaska Department of Law (2 AAC 96.325 response times)(law.alaska.gov).gov
- Hawaii Uniform Information Practices Act, Haw. Rev. Stat. ch. 92F(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- Hawaii Administrative Rules ch. 2-71, agency procedures and fees (the 10-business-day count and the 2-71-32 public-interest fee waiver)(ags.hawaii.gov).gov
- New Mexico Department of Justice, Inspection of Public Records Act Compliance Guide, Ninth Edition(nmdoj.gov).gov
- Utah Code 63G-2-204, GRAMA requests, time limits and expedited response(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code 63G-2-403, appeals to the director of the Government Records Office (as amended effective May 6, 2026)(le.utah.gov).gov
- Colorado Open Records Act summary, Office of Legislative Legal Services (three-working-day standard, 25-cent page cap, $41.37 hourly research maximum)(content.leg.colorado.gov).gov
- Alabama Act 2024-278 (SB 270, enrolled), adding Ala. Code 36-12-43 through 36-12-46(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Indiana Code 5-14-3-9, denial of disclosure (the 24-hour and 7-day denial triggers in subsections (b) and (c))(iga.in.gov).gov
- Louisiana R.S. 44:33, immediate production of records not in active use and the three-day written certificate(legis.la.gov).gov
- New Hampshire RSA 91-A:7, superior court petition or ombudsman complaint, and the rule in paragraphs III and IV that choosing one forecloses the other(gc.nh.gov).gov
- N.C. Gen. Stat. 132-9, action to compel disclosure (no jurisdiction absent the 7A-38.3E mediation) and attorney fees(ncleg.gov).gov
- Wyoming Public Records Act, Wyo. Stat. Ann. 16-4-201 to 16-4-205 (the 16-4-202(c)(v) review route and the 16-4-203(f) escalation)(wyoleg.gov).gov
- Vermont 1 V.S.A. 319, de novo review, agency burden, docket precedence and mandatory fees for a substantially prevailing complainant(legislature.vermont.gov).gov
- Ohio Rev. Code 2743.75, Court of Claims public records complaints ($25 filing fee, no attorney fees or statutory damages)(codes.ohio.gov).gov
- Massachusetts M.G.L. c. 66, 10A, Supervisor of Records petitions and the independent civil action in subsection (c)(malegislature.gov).gov
- Mississippi Public Records Act, Miss. Code Ann. Title 25 ch. 61, full text (25-61-13: no exhaustion required)(ethics.ms.gov).gov
- Kansas K.S.A. 45-218, inspection of public records and the third-business-day written statement of grounds(ksrevisor.gov).gov
- Missouri 610.023 RSMo, custodian of records, the third-business-day rule and written grounds for denial(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- Neb. Rev. Stat. 84-712, right to examine public records as amended by Laws 2024 LB43(nebraskalegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 1-27-1, right of all citizens of this state and all other persons interested to examine public records(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- Delaware FOIA, 29 Del. C. ch. 100 (10003 access, 10005 enforcement and the Attorney General petition)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Va. Code 2.2-3713, enforcement, the three-working-day service condition on the seven-day hearing, and fees to a substantially prevailing petitioner(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov