The Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Oct. 8 in a dispute over whether Highland Park ISD is required to disclose records of an investigation into potential mismanagement of the Seay Tennis Center.
The arguments in Texas Public Policy Foundation v. Highland Park Independent School District will be held starting at 9 a.m. at the SMU Dedman School of Law, 3315 Daniel Ave. They will be streamed live here.
According to documents filed in connection with the case, Highland Park ISD hired a law firm in 2019 to investigate complaints of financial issues at the tennis center and provide legal advice. The law firm engaged an accounting firm to assist in the investigation.
The accounting firm gave a report containing the results of its investigation to the law firm, which used that report to advise HPISD. But the law firm never provided a copy of the report to the school district, according to court filings.
The district’s then-assistant superintendent for business services later sent an email which stated, without disclosing the contents of the report, that “there is no mismanagement occurring, there is no malfeasance occurring, and there are no funds being misdirected or mismanaged,” according to court filings.
In 2022, the Texas Public Policy Foundation requested a copy of the report under the Texas Public Information Act. The Texas Attorney General’s office found that the report was protected by attorney-client privilege and the district withheld it, according to court filings.
The foundation then filed a petition to compel the report’s disclosure. A trial court viewed the report, concluded that it was privileged, and found that privilege had not been waived by the assistant superintendent’s email. An appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision, according to a summary of the case prepared by Texas Supreme Court staff.
The foundation petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to review the case in Sept. 2025. That petition was granted on Sept. 4 of this year.
According to the foundation’s petition, at issue is whether:
- The accounting firm’s report is subject to attorney-client privilege. The foundation asks the court to either reconsider a prior holding that attorney-client privilege applies to public information requests or hold that completed factual investigative reports for governmental entities should not be protected from those requests even if they were prepared at the direction of an attorney.
- Privilege was waived through the assistant superintendent’s email.
Author
