Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Energy Pol’y Advocates v. Ellison

Energy Pol’y Advocates v. Ellison

Supreme Court of Minnesota

September 28, 2022, Filed

A20-1344

Opinion

 [*150]  CHUTICH, Justice.

This case concerns the obligation of appellant, the Office of the Attorney General, to produce documents under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Data Practices Act), Minnesota Statutes sections 13.01 through 13.90 (2020). Respondent Energy Policy Advocates submitted document requests related to climate-change litigation to the Office of the Attorney General. After the Office determined that the request yielded no responsive, [**4]  nonprivileged public data, Energy Policy brought a civil action against Keith Ellison in his official capacity as Attorney General, and the Office of the Attorney General (collectively, Attorney General), seeking production of the documents under the Data Practices Act. The district court denied Energy Policy's motion to compel and dismissed the complaint. The court of appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison, 963 N.W.2d 485, 502 (Minn. App. 2021).

The primary issues on appeal concern the existence and scope of the common-interest doctrine, the applicability of the attorney-client privilege to internal communication among attorneys in public law agencies, and the contours of the section of the Data Practices Act governing Attorney General data. We now formally recognize the common-interest doctrine in Minnesota. We also conclude that the attorney-client privilege may apply to protect the confidentiality of internal communications among attorneys in public law agencies. Finally, we uphold the Legislature's classification of Attorney General data under Minnesota Statutes section 13.65, subdivision 1, as "private data on individuals," even when the data do not pertain to "individuals." Consequently, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals on these [**5]  issues and remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

FACTS

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

980 N.W.2d 146 *; 2022 Minn. LEXIS 402 **

Energy Policy Advocates, Respondent, vs. Keith Ellison, in his official capacity as Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Appellants.

Prior History:  [**1] Court of Appeals.

Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison, 963 N.W.2d 485, 2021 Minn. App. LEXIS 224 (Minn. Ct. App., June 1, 2021)

Disposition: Reversed and remanded to the district court.

CORE TERMS

attorney general, classification, nonpublic, common-interest, attorney-client, documents, Practices, confidential, classified, communications, district court, consumer, court of appeals, plain language, words, office of the attorney general, temporary, pertain, statutory interpretation, disclosure, collected, parties, balancing test, subdivision, agencies, courts, orders, decisions, mortgage, textual

Civil Procedure, Discovery, Privileged Communications, Attorney-Client Privilege, Evidence, Privileges, Attorney-Client Privilege, Elements, Work Product Doctrine, Scope of Protection, Scope, Waiver, Administrative Law, Governmental Information, Freedom of Information, Compliance With Disclosure Requests, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Governments, Courts, Common Law, Defenses & Exemptions From Public Disclosure, Interagency Memoranda, Work Product, Interagency Memoranda, State & Territorial Governments, Legislatures, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Constitutional Law, The Judiciary, Case or Controversy, Advisory Opinions, Judicial Review, De Novo Standard of Review, Legislation, Interpretation, Personal Information, Prohibition of Disclosure, Public Information, Access to Records, Authority to Adjudicate, Deference to Agency Statutory Interpretation