Judge allows access to business-related calls on Butch Davis’ cellphone

Robert Willett – newsobserver.com

Former North Carolina coach Butch Davis, surrounded by reporters during a news briefing before a 2010 practice.

A state Superior Court judge issued a decision Thursday that appears to pave the way for university-related calls that former UNC-Chapel Hill football Coach Butch Davis made on his personal cellphone to be accessible to lawyers representing the media in a public records lawsuit.

Judge Howard Manning stated in the decision that public business conducted by UNC chancellors and coaches on personal cellphones is public. But his decision allows Davis to keep private the cellphone bills to ensure that no personal matters become public. His decision allows media lawyers to review those billing records to identify university-related calls. The decision, however, does not specifically state that such calls could then be released to the public.

Manning wrote: “(I) do not believe that our government officials, including University officials and coaches, are entitled to use the personal cellphone ’dodge’ to evade the North Carolina Public Records law. If Chancellors of the UNC system are doing this thinking that they can avoid public scrutiny of their cellphone records by using their personal cellphones to conduct public business, they need to re-think their decision.”

The decision is in response to a public records lawsuit filed by The News & Observer, Charlotte Observer and other media companies as part of their coverage of a long-running NCAA investigation that culminated in a one-year bowl ban and the loss of athletic scholarships for the football team.

Davis had a UNC-CH cellphone, but never used it, acknowledging that he used his personal cellphone for UNC related business. At one point, he concurred to make his personal cellphone records public, but he changed his mind after the university fired him. UNC officials had brought in an outside lawyer to review the records – but not make duplicates of them – thereby preventing the media from getting the records through the university. They and Davis state the records do not reflect any improper behavior.

Davis’ attorney, Jon Sasser, stated Manning’s decision does not mean Davis’ business-related calls will become public – just that the media’s attorneys will get to review them. He called the judge’s decision a victory because it quashes a subpoena filed by lawyers for the media to produce the cellphone records, and also allows Davis’ request that the phone records be kept private.

Sasser stated he would also oppose any efforts to make the business-related calls public. He has contended that Davis and other university athletics coaches are not public officials subject to the public records law.

Amanda Martin, an attorney representing the media, stated the decision is “a bit hard to decipher” on that point, but she thinks ultimately the business-related calls will be made public. Manning’s decision identifies “Coach Davis’ private calling records for non-public/job related calls” as needing to be protected.

Manning told lawyers for both sides to work out an arrangement for the cellphone records review, but did not provide a deadline.

Manning also stated other records held by UNC-CH related to impermissible benefits received by athletes should be released if they do not involve academic matters , but others that are part of an attorney-client relationship between the university and a law firm it hired to help with the NCAA investigation are not. Among those attorney-client records, Manning wrote, are recorded interviews of those involved in the NCAA investigation.

The decision means UNC-CH records in which football players were found by the NCAA to have received impermissible benefits such as money and gifts are public, but those pertaining to academic issues such as cheating are not. Manning also wrote that unfounded allegations of NCAA violations are not public record.

Student education records are largely protected by the federal Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, commonly known as FERPA.

Manning also found the media may be entitled to “some award of attorneys’ fees” from UNC-CH, but stated that would have to be determined “by separate order and hearing if necessary.”

Related News:

• New efforts to curb cellphone theft
• Telcos press for review of cellphone tower radiation fines
• US FCC to Review Standards of Cellphone Use in Lieu of Health Risks of Radio …
• Nebraska Legislature to Review Bus Driver Cellphone Ban Bill
• Lafayette School Board member: Review cellphone policy
• Distress call: Residents seek review of BMC draft policy on cellphone towers
• Cellphone tower rattling residents
• Court tosses charges vs. Pershing County inmate over cellphone
• My Money: Cellphone fees confusing
• FAA Study of Cellphone Use on Board Aircraft

Details :
Submited at Friday, August 10th, 2012 at 1:00 am on Uncategorized by sofia
Comment RSS 2.0 - leave a comment - trackback