07020 Forums  

Go Back   07020 Forums > Politics > State & National Politics > OPRA

OPRA NJ Open Public Records Act

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-20-2017, 10:45 AM
prattjus prattjus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edgewater, NJ, USA
Posts: 508
prattjus is on a distinguished road
Supreme Court rules that fields of data extracted from e-mails are OPRA "government r

In a unanimous decision issued today in John Paff v. Galloway Township, et al, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA), "information in electronic form, even if part of a larger document, is itself a government record [and that] electronically stored information extracted from an email is not the creation of a new record or new information; it is a government record."

Thus, it appears that going forward, the public is generally entitled to information stored in government databases, subject to normal confidentiality constraints and payment of a service charge if extraction of the requested data requires “a substantial amount of manipulation or programming of information technology.”

In its ruling, the Court rejected the Appellate Division's April 18, 2016 opinion that held that for electronically stored information, “OPRA only allows requests for records, not requests for information.” The Supreme Court held that the Appellate Division's "position cannot be squared with OPRA’s plain language or its objectives in dealing with electronically stored information."

The Supreme Court also ruled that courts are to grant no deference to decisions or information advice given by the New Jersey Government Records Council (GRC) except when the Appellate Division considers appeals of GRC decisions. It also recognized that while "[i]t may take only two to three minutes for an IT Specialist to make accessible fields of information from two weeks of emails; it will take considerably longer for the Township Clerk and Chief of Police to determine whether the requested information in each email may intrude on privacy rights or raise public-safety concerns." Accordingly, the Court remanded the matter back to the trial court to address any such confidentiality concerns.

I was ably represented in the case by Walter M. Luers of Clinton.




More...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Supreme Court exempts security camera footage from OPRA disclosure. prattjus OPRA 0 11-23-2016 11:32 AM
Supreme Court Committee: No anonymous OPRA lawsuits. prattjus OPRA 0 03-02-2016 02:22 PM
Court rules on Meetings Act's "anticipated litigation" exception. prattjus OPRA 0 02-20-2016 04:14 AM
Supreme Court Committee mulls rules change to permit OPRA plaintiffs to remain anonym prattjus OPRA 0 08-09-2015 04:26 PM
Supreme Court holds that OPRA requires disclosure of settlement agreement prattjus OPRA 0 11-01-2010 04:46 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 07020.com - All rights reserved