{
 "topic": "FOIA section 7(1)(m) - Attorney/auditor communications and litigation-preparation materials",
 "statute": "5 ILCS 140/7(1)(m)",
 "family": "FOIA exemptions (section 7)",
 "page": "https://illinoisfoia.org/issues/foia-7-1-m/",
 "note": "Determination letters are non-binding. Verify against the source PDF before citing.",
 "counts": {
  "violation_found": 15,
  "no_violation": 9,
  "no_determination": 0,
  "other": 0
 },
 "challenge_notes": {
  "generated_by": "AI summary of the decisions listed on this page; not legal advice; verify each decision against its PDF",
  "when_a_challenge_is_strong": [
   {
    "text": "The public body withheld or redacted a communication that appears to be a factual update or request for information, not legal advice.",
    "why": "The Bureau has found that purely factual communications are not privileged attorney-client communications or work product.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Emails about an investigation into a school district's finances",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36450/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Police reports redacted for attorney-client privilege",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66688/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Communications and a legal memo from a city planning department",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-85045/#issue-4"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body denied access to an audit report prepared by an outside accounting firm or external auditor, claiming the internal audit exemption.",
    "why": "The internal audit exemption under section 7(1)(m) does not apply to audits conducted by external parties.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Records provided to a village's auditors",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-82484/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Audit reports on a board's real estate and investment activities",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-44377/#issue-4"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body redacted only the names of attorneys or clients from legal invoices or correspondence.",
    "why": "The identity of a client or attorney is generally not privileged, and the public body must show that disclosure would reveal confidential communications or litigation strategy.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/#issue-5"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body provided a blanket assertion of privilege without specific evidence for each withheld record.",
    "why": "The Bureau requires objective indicia that each communication was for legal advice and kept confidential; blanket assertions are insufficient.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Emails between a township and its legal counsel",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-52748/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Correspondence between a governor's office and a former agency director",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36017/#issue-3"
     },
     {
      "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/#issue-2"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body withheld communications with an adversarial party, such as a public defender, claiming attorney-client privilege.",
    "why": "Section 7(1)(m) does not apply to communications between adversarial parties because there is no attorney-client relationship.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Emails between four individuals over three months",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-69899/#issue-3"
     }
    ]
   }
  ],
  "when_the_body_usually_wins": [
   {
    "text": "The public body redacted detailed descriptions in legal invoices that reveal the specific nature of legal advice sought or provided.",
    "why": "Detailed billing entries that reveal confidential attorney-client communications are exempt.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Legal fee invoices for Title IX matters",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-86152/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/#issue-1"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body withheld emails or correspondence directly between agency employees and the agency's attorney that seek or provide legal advice.",
    "why": "Communications between a public body and its attorney for confidential legal advice are exempt under section 7(1)(m).",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Records on business transfer verification and tobacco licensing",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-86063/#issue-3"
     },
     {
      "title": "Emails withheld under attorney-client privilege and insurance exemptions",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-80023/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Correspondence about classroom observations and integration",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-53659/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/#issue-3"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body withheld an investigative report prepared by its attorney for the purpose of providing legal advice.",
    "why": "Investigative reports prepared by attorneys to provide confidential legal advice are exempt.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Investigative reports on sexual harassment allegations",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-81203/#issue-2"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "The public body withheld a record compiled by an internal auditor during a review of a public body's process.",
    "why": "Records compiled by an internal auditor fall within the internal audit exemption.",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "University records claimed exempt under personal privacy",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-38669/#issue-1"
     }
    ]
   }
  ],
  "points_to_put_in_the_letter": [
   {
    "text": "If the record appears to be a factual update or request for information, argue that it is not legal advice and thus not exempt. Cite that the Bureau has found purely factual communications are not privileged.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Emails about an investigation into a school district's finances",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36450/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Police reports redacted for attorney-client privilege",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66688/#issue-1"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "If the public body redacted only names or titles from billing records, argue that the identity of attorneys and clients is generally not privileged, and the body must show how disclosure would reveal confidential communications.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/#issue-5"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "If the public body claims the internal audit exemption for a report by an outside firm, point out that the exemption only applies to internal audits, not those by private accounting firms or external auditors.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Records provided to a village's auditors",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-82484/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Audit reports on a board's real estate and investment activities",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-44377/#issue-4"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "If the public body provided only a blanket privilege log, demand that they provide objective indicia for each withheld communication, showing it was for legal advice and kept confidential.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Emails between a township and its legal counsel",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-52748/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Correspondence between a governor's office and a former agency director",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36017/#issue-3"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "If the communication is with an adversarial party like a public defender, argue that there is no attorney-client relationship, so the exemption does not apply.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Emails between four individuals over three months",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-69899/#issue-3"
     }
    ]
   }
  ],
  "facts_to_gather": [
   "Whether the record is an audit report prepared by an external firm rather than internal staff.",
   "Whether the redacted or withheld communication appears to be a factual update or request for information, not legal advice.",
   "Whether the public body redacted only names or titles from legal invoices or correspondence.",
   "Whether the public body provided a detailed privilege log or only a blanket assertion of privilege.",
   "Whether the communication involves an adversarial party, such as a public defender."
  ],
  "common_mistakes": [
   {
    "text": "Assuming that any email sent to or from an attorney is automatically exempt from disclosure.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "Emails about an investigation into a school district's finances",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36450/#issue-2"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "Accepting a blanket assertion of privilege without demanding objective indicia for each record.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Emails between a township and its legal counsel",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-52748/#issue-2"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "Redacting attorney or client names from invoices without showing that disclosure would reveal litigation strategy or confidential communications.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/#issue-2"
     },
     {
      "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/#issue-5"
     }
    ]
   },
   {
    "text": "Applying the internal audit exemption to reports prepared by outside accounting firms or external auditors.",
    "why": "",
    "decisions": [
     {
      "title": "Records provided to a village's auditors",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-82484/#issue-1"
     },
     {
      "title": "Audit reports on a board's real estate and investment activities",
      "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-44377/#issue-4"
     }
    ]
   }
  ],
  "caution": "These notes are based on non-binding determination letters; outcomes depend on specific facts, and you should verify the full PDF of any cited decision."
 },
 "issues": [
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of legal invoice details under FOIA section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Detailed descriptions of legal work revealing confidential attorney-client communications are exempt, but generic descriptions like 'telephone conference' are not.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Legal fee invoices for Title IX matters",
    "date": "2025-09-17",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-86152/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People v. ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193 (1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 12-005",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/2012-pac-18205/"
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 14-002",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/2014-pac-27500/"
    },
    {
     "text": "Sandra T.E. v. South Berwyn School District 100, 600 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2010)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding attorney-client communications under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Communications between a public body and its attorney seeking or providing legal advice are exempt if they remain confidential and are not shared with outside parties.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Records on business transfer verification and tobacco licensing",
    "date": "2025-04-22",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-86063/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, ¶ 40",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 470 (2003)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of April 18, 2024, memo email under 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "The email contains legal guidance from a City attorney to the Department concerning a zoning issue, and the privilege was not waived by inadvertent partial disclosure.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Communications and a legal memo from a city planning department",
    "date": "2025-03-26",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-85045/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193 (1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225 (2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. 2d 60 (2001)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of page 10 email line under 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The Department failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that the redacted line reflects legal guidance sought or given, so the redaction was improper.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Communications and a legal memo from a city planning department",
    "date": "2025-03-26",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-85045/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456 (2003)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Section 7(1)(m) exemption for records given to external auditors",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "Records provided to an external auditor are not materials prepared or compiled with respect to internal audits and thus are not exempt under section 7(1)(m).",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Records provided to a village's auditors",
    "date": "2024-12-04",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-82484/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 44377, issued February 1, 2017",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-44377/"
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 17844, issued April 11, 2012",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 14434, issued September 6, 2011",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding of investigative report under attorney-client privilege",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Investigative reports prepared by attorneys to provide confidential legal advice to a public body are exempt under section 7(1)(m).",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Investigative reports on sexual harassment allegations",
    "date": "2024-10-16",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-81203/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Sandra T.E. v. South Berwyn School District 100, 600 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2010)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 81704",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding e-mails under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "E-mails between Village employees and the Village's attorney seeking or providing legal advice are exempt attorney-client communications.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Emails withheld under attorney-client privilege and insurance exemptions",
    "date": "2024-06-06",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-80023/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2d Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Garvey, 109 F.R.D. 323, 327 (N.D. Cal. 1985)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (5th Dist. 1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, 940, 998 N.E.2d 1212, 1221-22 (2013)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Section 7(1)(m) attorney-client privilege for Bench Book",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The Bench Book is not privileged because it does not convey legal advice based on underlying confidential communications.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "An administrative law judge bench book on vehicle enforcement",
    "date": "2023-03-17",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-71954/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2d Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Garvey, 109 F.R.D. 323, 327 (N.D. Cal. 1985)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (5th Dist. 1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, ¶40, 998 N.E.2d 1212, 1221-22 (2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Fischel, 557 F.2d 209, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1977)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Colton v. United States, 306 F.2d 633 (2d Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 951, 83 S. Ct. 505 (1963)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Towne Place Condominium Ass' n v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co., 284 F. Supp. 3d 889, 894 (N.D. Ill. 2018)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass' n, 204 Ill. 2d at 470",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "American Immigration Council, 905 F. Supp. 2d at 222-23",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Section 7(1)(m) attorney work product for Bench Book",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The Bench Book is not attorney work product because it was not prepared for a particular trial or hearing.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "An administrative law judge bench book on vehicle enforcement",
    "date": "2023-03-17",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-71954/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att' y PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 20541, issued January 10, 2013, at 4",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Monier v. Chamberlain, 35 Ill. 2d 351, 359 (1966)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "American Immigration Council, 905 F. Supp. 2d at 222",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding emails with Public Defender under 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "Section 7(1)(m) does not apply to communications exchanged by adversarial parties, as there is no attorney-client relationship or work product protection.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Emails between four individuals over three months",
    "date": "2023-07-18",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-69899/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225 (2d Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363 (5th Dist. 1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Dalen v. Ozite Corp., 230 Ill. App. 3d 18 (2nd Dist. 1992)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Eagle Compressors, Inc., v. HEC Liquidating Corp., 206 F.R.D. 474 (N.D. Ill. 2002)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Nelson v. County of Kendall, 2014 IL 116303",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Newman, Raiz & Shelmadine, LLC. v. Brown, 394 Ill. App. 3d 602 (1st Dist. 2009)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 39421",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redactions under section 7(1)(m) attorney-client privilege",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "A public body must provide objective indicia that redacted communications are confidential legal advice, not merely factual narratives involving an attorney.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Police reports redacted for attorney-client privilege",
    "date": "2024-06-18",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66688/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2nd Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, ¶ 40, 998 N.E.2d 1212, 1221-22 (2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board Of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 470 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Dawson v. New York Life Ins. Co., 901 F. Supp. 1362, 1367 (N.D. Ill. 1995)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Digital Vending Services International, Inc. v. University of Phoenix, Inc., No. 2:09-CV-555, 2013 WL 1560212, at *6 (E.D. Va., 2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Elder Care Providers of Indiana, Inc. v. Home Instead, Inc., No. 114-CV-01894SEBMJD, 2016 WL 881176, at *4 (S.D. Ind. 2016)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of detailed legal billing information under 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Detailed billing entries revealing the substance of confidential attorney-client communications are exempt from disclosure under the attorney-client privilege.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
    "date": "2021-04-30",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 467 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 203-04 (1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Clarke v. American Commerce National Bank, 974 F.2d 127, 130 (9th Cir. 1992)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hampton Police Association v. Town of Hampton, 162 N.H. 7, 15, 20 A.3d 994, 1001 (N.H. 2011)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "U.S. v. Naegele, 468 F.Supp.2d 165, 171 (D.D.C. 2007)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Tipton v. Barton, 747 S.W.2d 325, 332 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394, 403 (4th Cir. 1999)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 12-005, issued March 12, 2012",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/2012-pac-18205/"
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 14-002, issued April 15, 2014",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/2014-pac-27500/"
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of client and attorney names under 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The identity of clients and attorneys is generally not privileged and cannot be redacted absent a showing that disclosure would reveal confidential communications or litigation strategy.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Invoices and purchase orders for legal services",
    "date": "2021-04-30",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-66131/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Clarke v. American Commerce National Bank, 974 F.2d 127, 130 (9th Cir. 1992)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 56112, issued April 8, 2019, at 8",
     "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/"
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding all correspondence with outside counsel",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "Not all attorney-client communications are exempt; the public body must show that each withheld communication contains or reveals legal advice or work product.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
    "date": "2019-04-08",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2d Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re General Instrument Corp. Securities Litigation, 190 F.R.D. 527, 531 (N.D. Ill. 2000)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "United States v. Evans, 113 F.3d 1457, 1461 (7th Cir. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Association v. Illinois State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 470 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (5th Dist. 1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, ¶ 40, 998 N.E.2d 1212, 1221-22 (2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 32087, issued June 9, 2015, at 2",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Supreme Court Rule 201(b)(2) (effective July 30, 2014)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Monier v. Chamberlain, 35 Ill. 2d 351, 359-60 (1966)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Waste Management, Inc., v. International Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 144 Ill. 2d 178, 196 (1991)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Proposed redactions of correspondence",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Redactions are proper when limited to communications made to an attorney for legal advice or in which the attorney provided legal advice, and the privilege has not been waived.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
    "date": "2019-04-08",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2d Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Redaction of attorney names from legal invoices",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The identity of a client or attorney is generally not privileged; redacting only names or titles from billing descriptions is improper unless disclosure would reveal confidential communications or litigation strategy.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "A village's legal invoice redactions and copying fees",
    "date": "2019-04-08",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-56112/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Clarke v. American Commerce National Bank, 974 F.2d 127, 130 (9th Cir. 1992)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hampton Police Association v. Town of Hampton, 162 N.H. 7, 15, 20 A.3d 994, 1001 (N.H. 2011)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "U.S. v. Naegele, 468 F. Supp. 2d 165, 171 (D.D.C. 2007)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Tipton v. Barton, 747 S.W.2d 325, 332 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394, 403 (4th Cir. 1999)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding of attorney-client communications under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "Section 7(1)(m) exempts communications between a public body and its attorney for confidential legal advice that would not be subject to discovery in litigation.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Correspondence about classroom observations and integration",
    "date": "2019-02-07",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-53659/"
   },
   "authorities": []
  },
  {
   "issue": "Whether withheld emails are exempt under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "A public body claiming section 7(1)(m) must provide objective indicia that communications were for legal advice and kept confidential; blanket privilege log assertions are insufficient.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Emails between a township and its legal counsel",
    "date": "2018-10-17",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-52748/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2nd Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re Marriage of Granger, 197 Ill. App. 3d 363, 374 (5th Dist. 1990)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "People v. Radojcic, 2013 IL 114197, ¶ 40, 998 N.E.2d 1212, 1221-22 (2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board Of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 470 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Novelty, Inc. v. Mountain View Marketing, Inc., 265 F.R.D. 370, 380 (S.D. Ind. 2009)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 50376, issued February 20, 2018, at 4",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 25694, issued August 13, 2014, at 5",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Ninth request KPMG audit report under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "The internal audit exemption does not apply to audits prepared by a private accounting firm.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Audit reports on a board's real estate and investment activities",
    "date": "2017-02-01",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-44377/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Req. Rev. Ltr. 17844, issued April 11, 2012",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. Req. Rev. Ltr. 14434, issued September 6, 2011",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Work product exemption for withheld email",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "A purely factual status update that does not reveal attorney theories, mental impressions, or litigation strategy is not protected work product.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
    "date": "2016-04-08",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 28304",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Waste Management, Inc. v. International Surplus Lines Insurance, Co., 144 Ill. 2d 178 (1991)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Monier v. Chamberlain, 35 Ill. 2d 351 (1966)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Holland v. Schwan's Home Services, Inc., 2013 IL App (5th) 110560",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Mau v. North American Asbestos, Corp., 156 Ill. App. 3d 926 (4th Dist. 1987)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Attorney-client privilege exemption for withheld email",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "An email conveying only factual information rather than legal advice is not a privileged attorney-client communication.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Attorneys' emails with factual updates to clients",
    "date": "2016-04-08",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-39684/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225 (2nd Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Garvey, 109 F.R.D. 323 (N.D. Cal. 1985)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re General Instrument Corp. Securities Litigation, 190 F.R.D. 527 (N.D. Ill. 2000)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "U.S. v. Evans, 113 F.3d 1457 (7th Cir. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Ill. Education Association v. Ill. State Board of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456 (2003)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Dawson v. New York Life Ins. Co., 901 F. Supp. 1362 (N.D. Ill. 1995)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Digital Vending Services International, Inc. v. University of Phoenix, Inc., No. 2:09-CV-555, 2013 WL 1560212 (E.D. Va. 2013)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Elder Care Providers of Indiana, Inc. v. Home Instead, Inc., No. 1:14-CV-01894SEBMJD, 2016 WL 881176 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 8, 2016)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Internal audit report within section 7(1)(m) exemption",
   "outcome": "no_violation",
   "rule": "A record compiled by an internal auditor during a review of a public body's process falls within the section 7(1)(m) exemption for internal audit materials.",
   "decision": {
    "title": "University records claimed exempt under personal privacy",
    "date": "2016-03-31",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-38669/"
   },
   "authorities": []
  },
  {
   "issue": "Section 7(1)(m) exemption for e-mails",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "E-mails that merely request and furnish factual information do not reveal attorney theories, mental impressions, or litigation plans and are not work product exempt under section 7(1)(m).",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Emails about an investigation into a school district's finances",
    "date": "2015-11-23",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36450/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "Illinois Supreme Court Rule 412(j)(i)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Supreme Court Rule 201(b)(2)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Monier v. Chamberlain, 35 Ill. 2d 351 (1966)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "issue": "Withholding legal update under section 7(1)(m)",
   "outcome": "violation_found",
   "rule": "A public body must provide objective indicia that a communication is a privileged attorney-client communication to withhold it under section 7(1)(m).",
   "decision": {
    "title": "Correspondence between a governor's office and a former agency director",
    "date": "2016-03-31",
    "binding": false,
    "url": "https://illinoisfoia.org/opinions/letter-36017/"
   },
   "authorities": [
    {
     "text": "People ex rel. Ulrich v. Stukel, 294 Ill. App. 3d 193, 201 (1st Dist. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Cangelosi v. Capasso, 366 Ill. App. 3d 225, 228 (2nd Dist. 2006)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Garvey, 109 F.R.D. 323, 327 (N.D. Cal. 1985)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "In re General Instrument Corp. Securities Litigation, 190 F.R.D. 527, 531 (N.D. Ill., 2000)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "U.S. v. Evans, 113 F.3d 1457, 1461 (7th Cir. 1997)",
     "url": null
    },
    {
     "text": "Illinois Education Ass'n v. Illinois State Board Of Education, 204 Ill. 2d 456, 470 (2003)",
     "url": null
    }
   ]
  }
 ]
}