IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST LOUIS COUNTY

STATE OF MISSOURI

THE SUNSHINE AND GOVERNMENT

ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

Plaintiff,
v. Case No. ________________

JULIA CHILDREY, Custodian and Acting

Director of the St. Louis County Department of
Justice Services,

Serve: HOLD FOR SERVICE

and

ST. LOUIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE SERVICES,

Serve: HOLD FOR SERVICE

Defendants.

PETITION FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiff SUNSHINE AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUTABILITY PROJECT brings this

action for declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendants Julia Childrey, in her official

capacity as Custodian and Acting Director of the Department of Justice Services and against St.

Louis County Department of Justice Services to require public disclosure of records pursuant to

the Missouri Sunshine Law (“Sunshine Law”), Chapter 610 of the Missouri Revised Statutes.

1
 1. Shortly after three St. Louis County residents, Lamar Catchings, John Shy, and

Larry “Jay” Reavis experienced health crises that rapidly led to their deaths in the St. Louis County

Justice Center, attorney Mark Pedroli, on behalf of the Sunshine and Government Accountability

Project (“Sunshine Project”), served a Sunshine Request upon Julia Childrey, Custodian for the

St. Louis County Department of Justice Services (“Department of Justice Services”), on April 5,

2019, seeking a variety of general and special information related to the operations of the St. Louis

County Justice Center and jail operations, see attached Exhibit A.

2. Lamar Catchings was twenty years old when he died, John Shy was twenty-nine

years old, and Larry “Jay” Reavis was fifty-one years old.

3. The rapid succession of these unexplained deaths, in a two-month period, quickly

became a matter of intense public concern1.

4. In response, Julia Childrey, Custodian for the Department of Justice Services,

replied to attorney Mark Pedroli and the Sunshine Project stating that every single record requested

was closed and would be concealed from public scrutiny, see attached Exhibit B.

5. Missouri’s Sunshine Law provides that “all public records of public governmental

bodies . . . be open to the public for inspection and copying,” § 610.011.1-2, RSMo, and that its

provisions in favor of disclosure “be liberally construed and [its] exceptions strictly construed to

promote this public policy.” § 610.011.1.

1
Kohler, Jeremy, March 8, 2019, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, “Workers and nurses are focus of
investigation of St. Louis County jail deaths”, https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-
and-courts/workers-and-nurses-are-focus-of-investigation-of-st-louis/article_9c5c07e5-a662-
55ab-8d1b-a1bbc1811d0f.html
2
 Examples of Requested Records

6. The Sunshine Project served twenty-four requests for records on Julia Childrey and

the Department of Justice Services for records as mundane as “St. Louis County jail budgets for

the past three years”, see Request No. 22 attached as Exhibit A

7. By way of further example, Request No. 1 asked for “bids, contracts, and invoices

for the past three years between St. Louis County and/or St. Louis County Justice Center and any

medical service provider to the St. Louis County Jail, including but not limited to hospitals,

doctors, nurses, ambulance, transportation, and physician assistants.” see attached Exhibit A

8. By way of further example, Request No. 4 sought “All records showing the daily

or weekly inmate population over the past twelve months.” See attached Exhibit A

Violations of the Sunshine Law

9. Julia Childrey and the Department of Justice Services denied access to every single

record responsive to the twenty-four requests and responded in writing that all the requested

records are “closed records pursuant to RSMo 610.021 (1) as well as 610.021 (3), (13), (14), (19)

and SLCRO 114.020 (1), (3), (13) (14) and (18)” without specifying which purported exception

applied to which request and without further explanation. attached Exhibit B

10. Sunshine Project’s requests are subject to disclosure under the Sunshine Law as

“public records,” because they are “retained by or of [a] public governmental body,” which

includes the Department of Justice Services, § 610.010.6, RSMo, and they are not protected from

disclosure by any lawful exemption.

11. The Sunshine Law provides that “[i]t is the public policy of this state that meetings,

records, votes, actions, and deliberations of public governmental bodies be open to the public

3
unless otherwise provided by law,” and that “all public records of public governmental bodies . . .

be open to the public for inspection and copying.” § 610.011.1-2, RSMo.

12. To that end, the Sunshine Law requires that its provisions in favor of disclosure “be

liberally construed and their exceptions strictly construed to promote this public policy.”

§ 610.011.1, RSMo. For example, “[i]f a public record contains material which is not exempt from

disclosure as well as material which is exempt from disclosure, the public governmental body shall

separate the exempt and nonexempt material and make the nonexempt material available for

examination and copying.” § 610.024.1, RSMo.

PARTIES

13. Plaintiff Sunshine Project is an unincorporated association located in St. Louis

County, state of Missouri and attorney Mark Pedroli a founding and representative member of the

association.

14. Defendant Julia Childrey is the Director and Custodian of the records for the St.

Louis County Department of Justice Services and a Missouri resident.

15. Defendant St. Louis County Department of Justice Services is a public

governmental body as defined by the Missouri Sunshine Law, § 610.010, RSMo. See also Missouri

Const., Art. IV, § 12; Chapter 27 of the Missouri Revised Statutes.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

16. Sunshine Project brings this action pursuant to § 610.027, RSMo. The action is

timely under § 610.027.5, RSMo.

17. The Court has jurisdiction over this action under § 610.027, RSMo, and Article V,

§ 14 of the Missouri Constitution.

4
 18. This Court may order declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to

§ 610.030, RSMo.

19. Venue is proper in this Court because the Department of Justice Services’ primary

place of business is St. Louis County. § 610.027.1, RSMo.

COUNT I
VIOLATION OF THE MISSOURI SUNSHINE LAW
Failure to produce documents responsive to the Sunshine Request

20. Sunshine Project incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1 through

17 as though fully set forth herein.

21. Sunshine Project’s request sought “public records of [a] public governmental

bod[y]” that are required by law to be made “open to the public for inspection and copying.” §

610.011.2, RSMo.

22. Julia Childrey and the Department of Justice Services failed to produce any of the

requested records and instead replied with a laundry list of Sunshine law exceptions without

explaining which exception applied to which numbered request.

23. The Sunshine Law authorizes recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs when a public

governmental body knowingly violates its provisions, § 610.027.3, RSMo, and mandates such

recovery for purposeful violations of its requirements. § 610.027.4, RSMo.

24. The Sunshine Law authorizes the Court to impose a civil penalty if the Court finds

that the public governmental body knowingly or purposely violated sections 610.010 to 610.026,

RSMo. §§ 610.027.3, 610.027.4, RSMo.

25. Julia Childrey and the Department of Justice Services knowingly and purposely

violated the Sunshine Law by failing to produce any records to the Sunshine Project in response

to the Sunshine Request.

5
 26. The Department of Justice Services possesses documents responsive to the

Sunshine Request, and some records are clearly not capable of being closed under the Sunshine

law.

27. As a result of Department of Justice Services’ knowing and purposeful violation of

the Sunshine Law, Julia Childrey and the Department of Justice Services is liable for civil

penalties, and for payment of Plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in relation to this ongoing

dispute.

WHEREFORE, the SUNSHINE AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor, declaring that the records requested

by plaintiff are open records subject to public inspection under the Sunshine Law; finding the Julia

Childrey and Department of Justice Services in knowing and purposeful violation of the Sunshine

Law; ordering the Department of Justice Services to permit Sunshine Project to inspect and copy

records responsive to the Sunshine Request; and ordering the Department of Justice Services to

pay Plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs, along with civil penalties and such other and further relief

as the Court deems just and necessary

COUNT II
VIOLATION OF THE MISSOURI SUNSHINE LAW
Failure to provide grounds for denial for each request pursuant to 610.023.4

28. Sunshine Project incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1 through

25 as though fully set forth herein.

29. Plaintiff wrote in the Sunshine Request “If access is denied to a record or any part

of a record, please provide the grounds of such denial pursuant to § 610.023(4)..”

6
 30. Defendants violated their obligation under § 610.023.4, RSMo by not citing “the

specific provision of law under which access is denied” in response to each of the Sunshine

Project’s numbered requests.

31. Instead, Defendants replied with blanket exceptions without informing Plaintiff

which exception applied to which request for records.

32. § 610.024.2, RSMo further states that “the public governmental body shall

generally describe the material exempted..” when separation and/or redactions occurs within a

record, further demonstrating that the grounds for denial of access or grounds for redaction of

information within a government record must be specifically provided for each denial or redaction

so that the requestor has enough information to challenge the denial or redaction. The same

principle prohibits blanket exceptions in response to separately numbered record requests. See

attached Exhibit C, an example of a proper, individualized redaction explanation provided by the

St. Louis City Police Department pursuant to a Sunshine request.

WHEREFORE, the SUNSHINE AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor, declaring that the records requested

by plaintiff are open records subject to public inspection under the Sunshine Law; finding the Julia

Childrey and Department of Justice Services in knowing and purposeful violation of the Sunshine

Law; ordering the Department of Justice Services to permit Sunshine Project to inspect and copy

records responsive to the Sunshine Request; and ordering the Department of Justice Services to

pay Plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs, along with civil penalties and such other and further relief

as the Court deems just and necessary

7
 COUNT III
VIOLATION OF THE MISSOURI SUNSHINE LAW
Failure to produce nonexempt material pursuant to 610.024.1 and 610.024.2

33. Sunshine Project incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1 through

30 as though fully set forth herein.

34. The Defendants failed to produce any records although knowing, at minimum, that

a record or some records requested by the Sunshine Project were open records under the Sunshine

law.

35. Moreover, if the Defendants believed that some of the requested records contained

exempt material or that some of the requested records contained some exempt material, the Justice

Center violated the § 610.024.1, RSMo., by not separating and/or redacting the exempt material

and then producing the nonexempt material.

36. Instead, Defendants, seemingly in a rush to close all records, decided in three

business days that there wasn’t one page, one phrase, or one word of nonexempt material in twenty-

four broad requests for records seeking broad categories of information regarding core functions

of the Department of Justice Services.

WHEREFORE, the SUNSHINE AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor, declaring that the records requested

by plaintiff are open records subject to public inspection under the Sunshine Law; finding the Julia

Childrey and Department of Justice Services in knowing and purposeful violation of the Sunshine

Law; ordering the Department of Justice Services to permit Sunshine Project to inspect and copy

records responsive to the Sunshine Request; and ordering the Department of Justice Services to

pay Plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs, along with civil penalties and such other and further relief

as the Court deems just and necessary

8
Dated: April 11, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

PEDROLI LAW, LLC

_______________________
Mark Pedroli, MBE 50787
7777 Bonhomme Ave, Suite 2100
Clayton, Missouri 63105
314.669.1817
314-789.7400 Fax
Mark@PedroliLaw.com