Private Information exemption

7(1)(b) is commonly referred to as the Private Information exemption. This exemption holds all private information exemptible except in cases where, “disclosure is required by another provision of this Act, a State or federal law, or a court order.” Private information is best defined using the language within the Illinois FOIA itself. “Private information means unique identifiers—such as a person’s social security number, driver’s license number, employee identification number, biometric identifiers, personal financial information, passwords or other access codes, medical records, home or personal telephone numbers, and personal email addresses. Private information also includes home address and personal license plates, except as otherwise provided by law or when compiled without possibility of attribution to any person.” 5 ILCS 140/2(c-5). It can also apply to “files, documents, and other data or databases maintained by one or more law enforcement agencies and specifically designed to provide information to one or more law enforcement agencies regarding the physical or mental status of one or more individual subjects.”

In order to successfully appeal a denial under 7(1)(b), it is best to start by looking at the precedents set by two of the most important court cases concerning the exemption. In Bowie v. Evanston Cmty. Consol. School Dist. the Illinois Appellate Court, First Judicial District ruled that school districts must comply with requests for data concerning test results if they are able to scramble and otherwise mask the information to protect the privacy rights of the students. In another case, Southern Illinoisan v. Department of Public Health, the court ordered the release of medical documents to a newspaper due to the information in question not exposing any patients names.

In a 2011 appeal a reporter for The News Gazette requested “all electronic communications, including cellphone text messages, sent and received by members of the city council and the mayor during city council meetings and study sessions since ( and including) May 3,” from the City of Champaign, IL. Having had his request denied under the Private Information exemption citing the 1991 case Quinn v. Stone that stated emails and text messages on private computers are not public information subject to FOIA, he appealed to the Public Access Counselor. Michael Luke, the counselor handing the case, arrived at the “opposite conclusion” from Quinn v Stone. The City of Champaign was ordered to release the documents from the private devices due to records not belonging to the councilmen, but instead to the City, since they were generated during official government proceedings.

If the data requested can be easily redacted to withhold private information leaking out, or if the information in question clearly pertains to official government business, the chances for a successful appeal are much greater. If the data is inextricably linked to individuals’ private information, then there is little chance for success. Therefore it is important to understand fully what documents you are requesting if appealing an invocation of the private information exemption.