City of Dallas v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas, and the Dallas Morning News, Inc.

Opinion

ACCEPTED

15-24-00081-CV

FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/27/2025 12:41 PM

CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK

FILED IN

15th COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

June 27, 2025 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

Clerk

Via e-Filing Christopher A. Prine, Clerk Fifteenth District Court of Appeals P.O. Box 12852 Austin, Texas 78711

Re: Court of Appeals Number: 15-24-00081-CV Trial Court Case Number: D-1-GN-23-002331

Style: City of Dallas v. Paxton

Dear Mr. Prine:

I am submitting this letter in response to your letter of June 23, 2025, concerning the information filed under seal for in camera inspection with the trial court. Please forward this information to the panel, Chief Justice Brister, and Justices Field and Farris. I thank you for your courtesy in this matter.

In your June 23, 2025 letter to counsel, you informed counsel that the information at issue in this case, which was filed under seal with the trial court, was not included in the record on appeal. Your letter further stated that “[t]he trial court clerk has confirmed to the clerk of this Court that it is not in possession of the documents. Moreover, the trial court docket does not include an order noting the filing of information for in camera inspection as contemplated by Section 552.3221(b).” You then asked that the parties “inform the Court whether the documents were filed in the trial court for in camera review” within seven days.

Appellant, the City of Dallas (the “City”), filed the information at issue with the trial court under seal for in camera inspection and

Christopher Prine June 27, 2025 Page 2 of 3

obtained an order pursuant to Government Code section 552.3221(b). I am attaching to this letter a true, correct, and filemarked copy of the trial court’s March 26, 2024 Order Sealing Information at Issue for In Camera Inspection. The order accurately reflects that on the date the trial court heard the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, the parties filed with the trial court the information at issue in this case for in camera inspection. The trial court also ordered the trial court clerk to file the information under seal, maintain the information, and transmit the information to the court of appeals as part of the record on appeal.

The trial court clerk’s representations to the clerk of this Court that the trial court clerk was not in possession of the documents were mistaken. Upon receiving the Court’s June 23, 2025 letter, the undersigned contacted the trial court clerk’s office and spoke with Max Herndandez, Director of the office’s civil division, to resolve the matter. Mr. Hernandez was able to immediately find the attached order on the trial court’s docket, and he also located the documents the parties filed under seal with the trial court. Mr. Hernandez then informed the undersigned that he would transmit the documents to this Court, and, on the same date, the City received notices from the Court that it had received a supplemental clerk’s record and documents for in camera inspection.

As the attached order1 and the supplemental clerk’s record demonstrates, the City filed the information at issue under seal with the trial court in a manner that conforms in all respects with the requirements of Government Code section 552.3221. The City therefore has not waived its opportunity to have the information at issue included in the appellate record.

1 The City presumes that the supplemental clerk’s record received by the Court on June 26, 2025, includes a copy of the attached order as part of the official record on appeal, as the order was affixed to the sealed box containing the information at issue in this case. The City was unable to confirm that the order was in fact included in the supplemental clerk’s record because, as of the date of this letter, counsel has been unable to download a copy of the supplemental clerk’s record from the attorney portal (presumably because the supplemental record includes information filed under seal).

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY - 1500 Marilla Street, Suite 7DN - Dallas, Texas 75201 - phone 214-670-3519 - fax 214-670-0622

Christopher Prine June 27, 2025 Page 3 of 3

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

/s/ Nicholas D. Palmer

NICHOLAS D. PALMER Executive Assistant City Attorney nicholas.palmer@dallas.gov

c: Via E-Service Thomas J. Williams (thomas.williams@haynesboone.com) William R. Pillifant (reid.pillifant@haynesboone.com) Attorneys for Appellee The Dallas Morning News, Inc.

Kathy Johnson (kathy.johnson@oag.texas.gov) Attorney for Appellee Ken Paxton

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY - 1500 Marilla Street, Suite 7DN - Dallas, Texas 75201 - phone 214-670-3519 - fax 214-670-0622 03/26/2024 04:32:09 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County

D-1-GN-23-002331

James Imarn Johnson

o

No. 26

oulilh Thomas J. Williams

Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Nicholas Palmer Bar No. 24067814 nicholas.palmer@dallas.gov Envelope ID: 102526395 Filing Code Description: Letter Filing Description: Appellant's Letter to Court Concerning Filing of Information Under Seal in Trial Court Status as of 6/27/2025 1:27 PM CST

Case Contacts

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status

Christian Young christian.young@oag.texas.gov 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT

Nicholas Palmer nicholas.palmer@dallas.gov 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT

Kathy Johnson kathy.johnson@oag.texas.gov 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT

Rosalind Hunt rosalind.hunt@oag.texas.gov 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT

Thomas J.Williams thomas.williams@haynesboone.com 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT

William ReidPillifant reid.pillifant@haynesboone.com 6/27/2025 12:41:33 PM SENT