Noel Chua, preparing a habeas case after criminal convictions, requested a document from the district attorney’s files under Georgia’s Open Records Act. The district attorney’s office invoked the attorney-work-product exception, and the trial court dismissed Chua’s complaint with prejudice. The Court of Appeals held that the office’s response did not satisfy the Act’s requirements for a timely and detailed explanation of the refusal. That procedural failure did not automatically entitle Chua to production, however, because the record did not establish whether the document actually fell within an exception. The court also held that the trial court erred by refusing to conduct an evidentiary hearing. An in-camera inspection had revealed too little about the document’s provenance to resolve the privilege question, so the trial court needed a factual record addressing the document and the claimed work-product protection. The court vacated the dismissal and remanded with direction for further proceedings, including consideration of the interaction between the Open Records Act and the civil-discovery work-product rule. The panel concurred unanimously.