U Memo 18-10Posted on Jun 28, 2018 in Informal Opinions - UIPA Opinions
U Memo 18-10
June 28, 2018
HART Attorney Invoices
A reporter made a record request for attorney invoices related to the Honolulu rail project and maintained by the Hawaii Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART). HART responded to the request, indicating that it would charge copy fees and would redact the invoices to protect attorney-client privileged information. Requester filed this appeal of HART’s bases for redaction.
OIP found that subsections (2), (3), and (4) of section 92F-13, HRS, allow HART to redact invoices provided by the law firm and invoices provided by the Hawaiian Electric Company for work done by its attorneys for payment of legal fees related to the rail project to protect information that qualifies for the attorney-client and attorney work product privileges. Names of other law firm clients contained in the invoices may be withheld under the UIPA’s privacy and frustration exceptions at sections 92F-13(1) and (3), HRS, respectively. The remainder of the invoices are public.