FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Albert C. Victoria II,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 88-5
Garrell S. Mullaney,
Superintendent, Norwich State Hospital,
Respondent August
10, 1988
The above-captioned matter was scheduled for hearing
February 19, 1988, at the same time as #FIC 87-262 because the complainant and
the respondent were the same in both cases.
At the hearing the respondent
presented a motion for findings and sanctions, and the parties presented
evidence and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following
facts are found:
1. The respondent
is a public agency within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter
dated December 4, 1987, the complainant requested copies of:
(a) audio and visual recordings and notes of his
October 1987, visits to the respondent;
(b) records pertaining to complaints filed by
the complainant in 1984 with Richard Wilbur, and with Drs. Van der Velde, and
Saracino.
3. By letter
dated December 9, 1987, the respondent stated that the requested records did
not exist.
4. It is found
that the audio and visual recordings and notes of the complainant's October
1987 visits do not exist.
5. It is found
that the complaints to which the complainant refers were made orally.
6. It is found
the respondent has searched his own files, the file of the complainant, the
files of Drs. Van der Velde, and Saracino, and the files of Richard Wilbur, and
he has been
#FIC 88-5 page two
unable to locate any records
pertaining to the oral complaints filed by the complainant.
7. It is found
that the respondent has failed to search
for the requested records in the file of the doctor against whom the
complaint was lodged (Dr. Kothari), and in the files of investigations of
complaints filed in 1984.
8. It is
concluded that the respondent has failed to perform a complete search for the
requested records, and, therefore, he has failed to prove that the records
pertaining to the oral complaints of the complainant in 1984, do not exist.
9. At the hearing
the respondent agreed to search and to determine whether additional records
which fall within the scope of the complainant's request are in any
investigation files which exist for the year 1984, or whether such additional
records are in the file of Dr. Kothari.
10. The
respondent has requested in his motion for findings and sanctions that this
Commission impose a civil penalty against the complainant because the
complainant has harassed the respondent with repeated, identical requests for
records.
11. It is found
although the complainant has made repeated, identical requests to the
respondent, these requests were not made solely to harass the respondent.
12. The
Commission declines to impose a civil penalty against the complainant in this
case.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint.
1. Within two
weeks of the date he receives notice of this final decision, the respondent
shall search the file of Dr. Kothari
and the records of investigations of complaints for 1984 and, if he locates any
records which fall within the scope of the complainant's request, he shall
provide copies of these records to the complainant.
2. Within two
weeks of the date he receives notice of this final decision, the respondent
shall provide this Commission with an affidavit stating that he has searched
the file of Dr. Kothari and the records of investigations of complaints
for
#FIC 88-5 page three
1984, and stating further
that copies of records within the scope of the complainant's request, if any
were found as a result of his search, were provided to the complainant.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information
Commission at its special meeting of August 10, 1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission