Judge Hears Lawsuit Over OU Transparency In Misconduct Investigation

Cleveland County Judge Michael Tupper heard arguments Friday in a lawsuit challenging the University of Oklahoma’s refusal to release findings from a $1 million investigation into alleged misconduct by former university leaders.

The lawsuit filed by NonDoc, a non-profit newsroom, accuses OU of violating Oklahoma’s open records laws by withholding documents related to the 2018 investigation conducted by Jones Day, a private law firm. The publicly funded university hired the law firm when allegations surfaced claiming that OU had inflated alumni donor data given to U.S. News & World Report to improve the institution’s rankings on national “Best Colleges” lists.

The scope of the investigation expanded in 2019 when former students accused then-OU President David Boren and then-Vice President Tripp Hall of sexual misconduct, including allegations of unwanted touching and kissing. Neither Boren nor Hall were indicted.

Tres Savage, the Editor in Chief for NonDoc, filed an Oklahoma Open Records Act request with the university in May 2019, seeking records derived from the internal investigation.

The university denied Savage’s request, arguing such records would be considered confidential personnel records under the ORA.

OU later released limited documents to one of the accusers, revealing additional witnesses in the investigation. Requests from news outlets were still denied.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), a group offering free legal support to Oklahoma journalist and news outlets, joined the fight for public records asking OU to reconsider releasing the investigative findings. After university officials failed to disclose the records in response to RCFP’s request, NonDoc and Savage sued the University of Oklahoma’s Board of Regents, arguing that the school violated the ORA by unlawfully withholding records responsive to their request.

The lawsuit urges the Cleveland County District Court to order the university to produce the records.

The university also sought to keep Wednesday’s hearing closed to the public, but the judge denied that motion. Both Boren and Hall were absent from the courtroom.

The arguments include the university's claim that the findings are personnel records and, therefore, exempt from disclosure, while Jones Day asserts attorney-client privilege.

NonDoc disputes those claims, arguing that OU, as a publicly funded institution, is obligated to release the records under state transparency laws.

The hearing was ongoing at the time of publication, with oral arguments still underway as of 11:30 a.m.