The South Carolina Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of the South Carolina Lottery Commission in a case involving public records requests. The court's decision, filed on July 29, 2026, affects how personal information of lottery winners is disclosed under the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The ruling is significant for individuals seeking access to government records and for public agencies handling such requests.
The case, George S. Glassmeyer v. South Carolina Lottery Commission, stems from a dispute over Glassmeyer's requests for information about lottery winners who claimed prizes of $1 million or more. The court's ruling clarifies the boundaries of FOIA and the obligations of public bodies in disclosing personal information.
Background
George S. Glassmeyer, the appellant in this case, had previously submitted several FOIA requests to the South Carolina Lottery Commission in 2013 and 2014. He sought detailed information about lottery winners, including their full names, addresses, and other personal details. The Lottery Commission denied these requests, citing statutory exemptions under FOIA.
In February 2022, Glassmeyer and the Lottery Commission reached a settlement agreement regarding the disclosure of lottery winner information. This agreement stipulated that if the South Carolina General Assembly did not enact new legislation by May 31, 2023, the Lottery Commission would provide certain information about lottery winners upon request. However, the General Assembly passed a new law that went into effect on July 1, 2023, which further restricted the disclosure of personal information about lottery winners.
The Ruling
The Court of Appeals upheld the circuit court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the Lottery Commission. The court found that the Lottery Commission did not breach the settlement agreement or violate FOIA by withholding the names of lottery winners. The ruling stated, "The Lottery Commission was explicitly prohibited from disclosing the lottery winners' full names under proviso 3.5, which became law effective July 1."
Additionally, the court ruled that the Lottery Commission acted correctly in redacting the signatures on checks issued to lottery winners, citing the Family Privacy Protection Act (FPPA) as the basis for this action. The court noted that the privacy interest in the signatures outweighed the public's interest in disclosing them, affirming that "the drawers' privacy interest in their signatures is not outweighed by the public's interest in confirming known information."
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for individuals seeking access to public records in South Carolina. It reinforces the idea that public agencies can refuse to disclose personal information if they are legally prohibited from doing so. The decision also highlights the balance between the public's right to know and individuals' rights to privacy, particularly concerning sensitive information.
Furthermore, the ruling sets a precedent for how FOIA requests are evaluated, particularly regarding what constitutes an "unduly burdensome" request. The court found that Glassmeyer's requests were overly broad and would require extensive resources to fulfill, thus justifying the Lottery Commission's refusal to comply. This aspect of the ruling may influence future FOIA requests and how public bodies respond to them.
What's Next
While the court's decision is final, it is possible that Glassmeyer could seek further review or appeal to a higher court. However, details about any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case may also prompt further legislative discussions regarding the transparency of public records and the protection of individual privacy in South Carolina.