L.J. was in the custody of the Harrison County jail when she died. After her death, her estate sued the County, claiming that jail officials knew of L.J.’s psychiatric history and failed to properly monitor her while in custody, resulting in her death. During discovery, the County sought disclosure of L.J.’s mental health records and involuntary commitment history, including records that pre-dated L.J.’s incarceration in the jail. Over the estate’s objection, the trial court ruled in favor of the County and agreed to release the records.

Since 1973, the Texas Supreme Court has recognized a common-law right of privacy that includes the right to be free from the publicization of one’s private affairs. This right protects information from disclosure when the information contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts, and the information is not of legitimate concern to the public. Yet, the trial court ordered the release of L.J.‘s psychiatric records irrespective of her right to privacy. L.J.’s estate has appealed this decision to the Texas Court of Appeals, and Cato has filed an amicus brief on its behalf.

Our brief argues that the common law right to privacy, along with Texas state law, prohibits the disclosure of L.J.’s psychiatric records. There are few things more intimate than a person’s health history. Mental health records contain highly intimate and potentially embarrassing facts, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person. In seeking these records, the County did not assert a public interest in the records, but rather its own litigation interest in the records as defendants in a lawsuit brought by L.J.’s estate. This is not sufficient to overcome the right to privacy under Texas law. The Texas Court of Appeals should reverse the trial court’s decision and protect L.J.’s right to keep her private information private.