Out-of-State Plaintiffs Covered by Open Public Records Act, Court Says
In a published opinion covering a trio of consolidated cases, a three-judge panel said the state Legislature, in enacting OPRA, didn't mean for it to appeal to in-state residents only.
May 16, 2018 at 05:38 PM
3 minute read
The Appellate Division ruled on Tuesday that a person seeking records under the state's Open Public Records Act does not have to be a resident of the state.
In a published opinion covering a trio of consolidated cases, a three-judge panel said the state Legislature, in enacting OPRA, didn't mean for it to appeal to in-state residents only.
“[W]e conclude that the right to request records under OPRA is not limited to 'citizens' of New Jersey,” said Appellate Division Judge Susan Reisner for the appeals court. Judges Richard Hoffman and Jessica Mayer joined in the ruling.
The ruling involved three cases: two brought by a former New Jersey resident, Harry Scheeler, and the other by the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington, D.C.-based civil rights nonprofit organization. Scheeler, who moved from New Jersey to North Carolina in 2014, sought access to records involving lawsuits settled by Atlantic County and Cape May County. The lawyers' committee was seeking documents relating to Atlantic City school attendance and disciplinary data.
In separate rulings, Burlington County Superior Court Judge Ronald Bookbinder and Atlantic County Superior Court Judge Nelson Johnson reached different conclusions. Bookbinder ruled in favor of Scheeler, while Nelson ruled against the lawyers' committee, on the grounds of standing.
The appeals court said the plaintiffs do have standing, even if they are not located in New Jersey, relying on the statutory language to reach that conclusion.
“In using the term 'citizens of this State,' the Legislature arguably created an ambiguity in N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1,” Reisner wrote. “However, we conclude that any ambiguity is easily resolved. Reading N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 sensibly, bearing in mind the context in which the phrase 'citizens of this State' is used, the terms the Legislature used in the rest of OPRA, and considering the statute's history and purpose, we cannot conclude that the Legislature intended to preclude out-of-state residents from making OPRA requests.”
As a matter of policy, the Issue of standing should be left to the Legislature and is not an issue for the court to consider, Reisner said.
The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, C.J. Griffin, said the ruling will have a significant impact.
“Had the Appellate Division ruled differently, out-of-state news agencies would have been precluded from filing OPRA requests in New Jersey. Even out-of-state persons who own summer homes or rental homes in New Jersey would have been precluded from filing OPRA requests, even though they clearly have an interest in doing so,” said Griffin, of Hackensack's Pashman Stein Walder Hayden.
The defendants' lead attorney, John Birchmeier of Birchmeier & Powell in Tuckahoe, didn't return a call for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Div. Follows Fed Reasoning on Recusal for Legislator-Turned-Judge
4 minute readChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 1Stock Trading App Robinhood Hit With Privacy Class Action 1 Month After Alleged Data Breach
- 2NY High Court Returns Fired Priest's Discrimination Claim to State Agency
- 3Digging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
- 4Reminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
- 5Consumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250