Administrative law judges must give the public a reason before sealing records or closing hearings in cases involving the disciplining of a physician, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The court's 5-0 ruling was the upshot of a lawsuit filed by The Island Packet against Chief Administrative Law Judge Marvin Kittrell, who had closed disciplinary proceedings involving Dr. James D. Johnston, a Hilton Head Island cardiologist who has faced repeated allegations of alcohol abuse.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of The Packet's assertion that Kittrell erred in closing the proceedings without first making a formal ruling explaining why closure was necessary. Had there been such a ruling, it could have been appealed. But Kittrell handled the case secretly -- even after The Packet asked him to open the proceedings -- so it was impossible to appeal his decisions.

"The manner in which the (administrative law court) closed the proceedings was inappropriate and did not comply with South Carolina law," Justice James E. Moore wrote for the court. The administrative law court "is a public body; and, as a public body, is required to make specific, express findings of fact when faced with an issue in which there is a dispute."

When deciding whether to close a proceeding, the court must balance several interests, considering such issues as fairness, the need for witness cooperation, the parties' reliance on confidentiality, the public or professional significance of the proceeding, and the potential harm of disclosure, the Supreme Court's ruling states.

Johnston, who practiced at Hilton Head Regional Medical Center, has repeatedly been sanctioned by the state Board of Medical Examiners since 2001.

On July 31, 2001, the medical board issued an order of temporary suspension against Johnston, finding that, since 1996, he had been arrested and charged with a litany of alcohol-related offenses: driving under the influence three times, twice having an open container, once leaving the scene of an accident, once driving to the left of center and once having no driver's license.

Johnston immediately appealed to the administrative law court, which overturned the suspension, finding that the board hadn't presented competent evidence of a substance abuse problem.

On Aug. 15, 2001, the medical board ordered Johnston to undergo an evaluation to determine whether he suffered from a disability that would make his practicing medicine dangerous to the public. The administrative law court again overturned the medical board's order.

In October of that year, the administrative law court ordered all records sealed.

The Supreme Court's ruling said Kittrell shouldn't have become involved in Johnston's case because the medical board hadn't finished handling it. Johnston should have waited for the medical board to issue a final order before asking the administrative law court to intervene.

However, once the administrative law court accepted the case, it was correct to seal the records, as long as it gave specific reasons for doing so, the Supreme Court ruled.

"When you're going to close proceedings and close records ... you're still obligated to make findings on the record that would justify the confidentiality," said Jay Bender, one of the three attorneys who represented The Packet. Attorneys Carl Muller of Greenville and John Moylan of Columbia also represented the newspaper.

Lawyers for Kittrell and Johnston could not be reached for comment.

Some of the implications of the Supreme Court ruling may be minimized by a change in state law that took effect earlier this summer.

The new law allows public access to formal complaints against a physician 10 days after the physician answers a complaint filed with the medical board. The law also requires that public hearings cannot be closed unless there is a formal order explaining the reasoning for closure.

"The General Assembly, using this case, revised the physician discipline system so as to make it a lot more open, so that the public understands what's going on in the disciplinary process at a much earlier stage," Bender said.

It's unclear where The Packet's case for open records goes next. The Supreme Court ordered Kittrell "to make specific findings, on the record ... explaining the need for closure of the disciplinary proceedings" against Johnston.

Johnston's status also is unclear. Last year, he agreed to stop practicing medicine until he successfully completed treatment for alcohol abuse, but it's not known whether he has resumed practice.

In a footnote, the Supreme Court ruling questions whether Johnston remains licensed to practice. But the state Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation lists Johnston as active, with his license expiring Dec. 31, 2007.

He also is facing federal charges of falsely posing as a U.S. citizen, when he actually is a Canadian citizen.

The Packet's suit against Kittrell was supported by a number of media organizations, including: The Associated Press, the South Carolina Press Association, The State and The Post and Courier newspapers, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the American Society of Newspaper Editors, the Radio and Television News Directors Association, and the Society of Professional Journalists.