Preview:

Kearns-Tribune Corp. v. Wilkinson, No. 960113, Filed September 23, 1997.

This opinion is subject to revision before final publication in the Pacific Reporter.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH

----oo0oo---- The Salt Lake Tribune), Petitioner, v. The Honorable Homer F. Wilkinson, a Judge in the Third Judicial DistrictCCourt, State of Utah, Salt Lake County Respondent.

No. 970351 Filed

September 23, 1997 Original Proceeding in this Court Attorneys: Michael Patrick O'Brien, Sharon E. Sonnenreich, Salt Lake City, for petitioner Brent M. Johnson, Salt Lake City, for respondent Jeffrey J. Hunt, Salt Lake City, for amicus Deseret News Publishing Co. Order on a Petition for an Extraordinary Writ

ZIMMERMAN, Chief Justice:

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/kearns.htm[5/10/2013 6:59:06 PM]

Kearns-Tribune Corp. v. Wilkinson, No. 960113, Filed September 23, 1997.

This matter came before the court on a petition for an extraordinary writ. Petitioner Kearns-Tribune Corporation ("Kearns-Tribune") seeks a writ compelling the Honorable Homer F. Wilkinson, respondent, to (i) vacate his decision rendered on June 10, 1997, and entered on July 14, 1997, finding that Kearns-Tribune lacked standing to claim access to documents filed by the district attorney requesting a secrecy order under the Investigative Subpoena Powers Act, sections 77-22-1 to -5 of the Utah Code, and (ii) grant KearnsTribune access to the documents requesting secrecy of the underlying investigation. The matter was heard before the court, sitting en banc, with Justice Stewart recused. Having considered the arguments and papers, and for the reasons discussed below, we grant the petition. We briefly recite the facts before turning to the standard of review and our analysis. In April of 1997, Kearns-Tribune wrote to the district court seeking access to documents it believed the district attorney had filed with the court. In that letter, Kearns-Tribune asked the district court for access to the district attorney's statement of good cause for commencing the investigation, his application to keep the file secret, and the signed closure order.(1) In response, the court held a colloquy with the district attorney and KearnsTribune. During that colloquy, the district attorney objected to KearnsTribune's request, arguing that Kearns-Tribune lacked standing to seek the records in question. The district court required Kearns-Tribune to intervene in the matter and present the court with a written motion, which it did. The district court heard oral argument on the matter in June and ruled from the bench that Kearns-Tribune lacked standing to seek access to the secrecy application and, alternatively, that Kearns-Tribune had failed to show good cause why the application for secrecy in the underlying investigation should be opened.

As to the standard of review, the question of whether a given individual or association has standing to request a particular relief is primarily a question of law, although there may be factual findings that bear on the issue. We will review such factual determinations made by a trial court with deference. State v. Pena, 869 P.2d 932, 935-36 (Utah 1994). Because of the important policy considerations involved in granting or denying standing, we will closely review trial court determinations of whether a given set of facts fits the legal requirements for standing, granting minimal discretion to the trial court. Id. at 938, 939.

Beginning our analysis, Kearns-Tribune contends that the language of section 77-22-2 of the Utah Code, as well as other provisions of state law and of the state constitution, give it the right to challenge an order by the district court granting the district attorney's request to keep secret the records relating to his investigation under the Investigative Subpoena Powers Act. See Utah Code Ann.

Download kearns.pdf

Utah Law