On June 30, Superior Court Judge Sherri Elliott, who was visiting from the judicial district made up of Burke, Caldwell and Catawba counties, published an order in favor of Rebecca Fitzgibbon, who sought to receive records she’d requested dating back as far as November 2022.

The suit, filed in 2023, alleged that the Shining Rock’s Head of School Josh Morgan and board members had violated state public records law by demanding excessive payments for fulfilment of the requests.

Fitzgibbon’s requests stemmed from an incident during which her son was being disciplined and was placed by Morgan in a Waynesville Police vehicle occupied by the school’s student resource officer, Waynesville Police Officer Bryan Reeves. As she inquired about other alleged similar incidents involving Morgan and Reeves, she believed there was a pattern of wrongdoing and abuse.

In her order, it appeared Elliott believed Fitzgibbon’s inquiries were perfectly reasonable.

“The information that Fitzgibbon developed came from sources in the community that Fitzgibbon found reputable, including herself, her own children, current and former Shining Rock employees and officials (including some of the named Defendants), and the parents or guardians of current and former Shining Rock students,” the order reads, noting also that throughout her inquiry, Fitzgibbon reported her concerns to “numerous local and state officials.”

Before and up to the point Fitzgibbon filed her requests, Smoky Mountain News Politics Editor Cory Vaillancourt filed numerous public records requests with the school. According to the order, while prior to 2018, Vaillancourt’s requests were answered promptly and without charge, once Morgan became head of school and took over the responsibility for answering such requests, the school began assessing fees, including one for over $1,500 that SMN refused to pay.

“As a result, Vaillancourt’s and his employer’s reporting on Shining Rock was significantly reduced because they could not obtain public records from Shining Rock to support their reporting,” the order reads.

In 2022, the school adopted a new public records procedure, which formalized the practice of charging for records.

Elliott concluded that public records must be provided upon request for free or at “minimal cost,” meaning the actual cost of reproducing the record, contrary to the practices Shining Rock had implemented.

“Shining Rock may not charge a fee for an uncertified copy of a public record that exceeds the actual cost to Shining Rock of making the copy,” the order reads. “'Actual cost’ is limited to Shining Rock’s direct, chargeable costs related to the reproduction of a public record as determined by generally accepted accounting principles and does not include costs that would have been incurred by Shining Rock if a request to reproduce a public record had not been made.”

“If it was necessary for Shining Rock to separate confidential from nonconfidential information in order to permit the inspection, examination, or copying of the public records in response to public records requests, then Shining Rock had to bear the cost of such separation,” the order later reads.

Ultimately, Elliott concluded that the school had no legal justification for failing to disclose at least some of the public records it withheld from Fitzgibbon. Likewise, there was no justification to charge Fitzgibbon for the cost of separating confidential and nonconfidential information.

“Shining Rock’s approach to charging for public records, and, later its formalized public records procedure, either on its face or as applied to Fitzgibbon and Vaillancourt, was an improper use of governmental authority to stop or inhibit the public from accessing public records and government information,” the order reads.

The public records order wasn’t Fitzgibbon’s only win. The defendants had countersued her for defamation, claiming that she had knowingly made false statements that hurt the school, its board and Morgan. However, Elliott ruled that Shining Rock’s legal counsel failed to prove that the information published or shared by Fitzgibbon that served as the basis for the defamation suit was false.

Elliott ordered Shining Rock to produce the public records Fitzgibbon requested on multiple dates. She also filed an injunction enjoining the defendants from using or applying any public records procedures in the future that violate the law as determined in her ruling, including pending requests such as Fitzgibbon’s or Vaillancourt’s.

Following Judge Elliott’s ruling, Shining Rock issued a statement saying it respects the judicial process and will follow the order accordingly.

“The court's decision clarifies important aspects of public records law that will benefit not only our school but other educational institutions throughout the state,” the statement reads. “We are committed to implementing the court's directives within the specified timeframe and will work diligently to ensure full compliance with all public records requirements moving forward.”

Check out The Smoky Mountain News next week for a deeper dive into the trial and what this ruling means for future public records requests in North Carolina.