United States: Texas Supreme Court Boosts Corporate Confidentiality Protections

The Texas Supreme Court ("Court") issued two recent opinions that may provide private companies with a greater ability to protect their confidential information in Texas even when dealing with public entities. The Court held that Section 552.104 of the Texas Public Information Act ("PIA"), which exempts from public disclosure information "that, if released, would give advantage to a competitor or bidder," applies not only to governmental bodies conducting competitive bidding but to private parties as well. Boeing Co. v. Paxton, No. 12-1007, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 (Tex. June 19, 2015). The Texas Attorney General and state courts historically concluded that private parties lacked standing to assert this exception in connection with a PIA request. In Boeing, however, the Court reversed this trend, finding that the statutory provision on its face does not limit the exemption to the government, and also clarified that a private party has standing to directly assert this exception, as opposed to relying on a governmental body to assert it.

To further this point, one week later, in Greater Houston Partnership v. Paxton, No. 13-0745, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 614 (Tex. June 26, 2015), the Court held that the Greater Houston Partnership, a private entity operating like a chamber of commerce, was not a "governmental body" subject to public disclosure of its private business affairs under the PIA. Similar to the Boeing opinion, the Court based its decision on the PIA's "plain and unambiguous language."

Both Boeing and Greater Houston show that even in light of the PIA's liberal construction mandate and overarching goal of increasing governmental transparency, Texas courts may now be willing to protect the confidentiality interests of private parties and curb the sweeping reach of the PIA by focusing on the text of the statute. This Commentary focuses on the Boeing case and how it may offer private companies a new tool to protect their confidential information.


In 1995, Boeing began a nationwide search for a suitable facility to conduct its business of maintaining and overhauling older aircraft for the military. Three years later, Boeing selected the Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio and signed a 25-year lease with the Greater Kelly Development Authority, later renamed the Port Authority of San Antonio (the "Port"). The Port is a tax-exempt enterprise incorporated by the city as a separate political jurisdiction. For two years, Boeing devoted a team of 12 employees and outside consultants to evaluate and negotiate a competitive agreement with the Port.

Several years after signing the lease with the Port, a former Boeing employee, Robert Silvas, submitted a PIA request for information about the lease. Pursuant to its statutory obligations, the Port notified Boeing about this request. Boeing provided a redacted version of the lease to Silvas and filed objections with the Texas Attorney General as to the redacted portions. Boeing argued that the redacted information was competitively sensitive information regarding its overhead costs at Kelly Air Force Base. According to Boeing, a competitor could use this information to underbid Boeing on government contracts. Boeing further argued that it took steps to safeguard and restrict the internal distribution of certain information in the lease, including rental rates, share of common maintenance costs, insurance coverage, liquidated damages provisions, and lease incentives.

The Attorney General concluded in an Open-Records Letter Ruling that the information withheld by Boeing was not exempt from disclosure under the PIA. Boeing sought declaratory and injunctive relief in Travis County district court and joined the Attorney General and the Port as parties. The trial court ordered Boeing to release the information, holding that (i) the information was not exempt under Section 552.110 of the PIA because it was not Boeing's proprietary information, a trade secret, or otherwise exempt under the exception; and (ii) Boeing did not have standing to assert the Section 552.104 exception protecting certain information related to competition or bidding. Boeing, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 at *8-9. Boeing appealed, and the Austin Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Before the Texas Supreme Court, Boeing argued that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that Section 552.104 did not apply to Boeing. The Attorney General, however, argued that this exception applies only to governmental bodies and not third parties like Boeing. Rejecting Boeing's argument that Section 552.104 on its face does not limit the exemption to governmental bodies, the Attorney General argued that the exemption must be read in the context of the PIA as a whole. The PIA, according to the Attorney General, seeks to balance governmental transparency with third-party privacy and confidentiality interests, and the PIA must be read in light of this balance. According to the Attorney General, if Section 552.104 were read in isolation and not in light of the PIA's overarching purpose, Section 552.104 would "create a super exception" so lenient that it would override the other exceptions. Boeing, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 at *12.

Boeing, on the other hand, argued that its position is supported by the text of the PIA and that the Attorney General was attempting to rewrite the PIA's provisions. As a general matter, according to Boeing, nothing in the PIA bars private standing to prevent public disclosure, and nothing in Section 552.104 restricts the provision to the government. Rather, the PIA as a whole grants standing to any "person who claims to be the victim of a violation." Boeing, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 at *12. Finally, Boeing argued that if Section 552.104 is too broad, then it is for the Legislature—not the Attorney General—to rewrite the statute.

The Texas Supreme Court's Analysis

The Court first took issue with the Court of Appeals' conclusion that Section 552.104 was a "purely discretionary exception" that the Port was free to waive. The Court of Appeals reached this conclusion by looking to Section 552.007, which permits a governmental body to voluntarily disclose "part or all of its information ... to the public, unless the disclosure is expressly prohibited by law or the information is confidential under law." Boeing, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 at *14. The Court rejected this interpretation of the PIA and concluded that the real issue is whether Boeing has the right under the Act to assert its own interests in protecting the information. The Court acknowledged that the PIA requires a governmental body to raise and argue any applicable disclosure as a prerequisite to judicial review but concluded that this rule does not apply when another person's privacy or property interests are implicated. In this case, the Court noted, the Port simply deferred to Boeing to protect its own interests, and the fact that the Port did not raise the Section 552.104 exception did not waive Boeing's right to raise the exception itself.

The Court then addressed the central question of Boeing's standing or right to raise the exception. According to the Court, no language in the PIA limits Section 552.104 to the government. Rather, Section 552.104 is positioned and referenced throughout the PIA similarly to the other provisions that potentially implicate "a person's privacy or property interests." In support of this conclusion, the Court emphasized that the PIA provision titled "Information Involving Privacy and Property Interests of Third Party" cites to Section 552.104 as one of several examples that might involve third-party privacy or property concerns. In light of these conclusions, the Court held that Section 552.104's exception applies to both the government and private parties and may be invoked by either to protect the privacy and property interests of a private party in accordance with its terms.

Finally, the Court considered whether the information withheld by Boeing would, in fact, give advantage to Boeing's competitors. The Court examined the record and noted that intense competition exists in the aerospace industry for large government contracts. Referencing testimony from a Boeing manager, the Court emphasized that the primary difference between competitors' bids was the overhead included in the final bid price. The Court also noted that Boeing protects certain financial aspects of its lease with the Port in order to prevent competitors from reverse-engineering Boeing's bid and that Boeing had lost bids to competitors over as little as a 1 percent difference in bids. The Court concluded that the undisputed evidence established that the withheld information "if released would give advantage to a competitor or bidder." Boeing, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 583 at *27-28.


The Boeing opinion creates a potent argument for companies seeking to protect sensitive business information from public disclosure in connection with a PIA request that, previously, was not thought to be viable. The Section 552.104 exception will likely be particularly helpful to companies that may not be able to prove that the information at issue is a trade secret or otherwise "confidential under law" but will be able to show that the information would give advantage to a competitor or bidder. Companies should be mindful, however, that while this exception appears to be broad, the Attorney General and Texas courts are likely to scrutinize the evidence presented by the company to determine—as emphasized in the dissenting opinion—if the information merely could give advantage to a competitor as opposed to the requisite showing that the information would give advantage. For example, the Attorney General and Texas courts will likely examine the extent to which companies safeguarded the information at issue and the level of competition in the particular industry. In other words, the testimony and evidence will be key.

Based on recent events, there may be a new tool set for companies to protect confidential information when bidding public jobs in Texas and dealing with public entities that were previously foreclosed, but this protection is going to depend heavily on the actual evidence presented and the facts and circumstances of that case. Nevertheless, protection under these new cases may still require the expense of fully litigating the matter.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Andrew D. Ness
William R. Taylor
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions