FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Richard R. Lindquist,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-337

 

Dean, Medical School, University of Connecticut Health Center,

 

                        Respondent                  March 13, 1991

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 4, 1991, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.  The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter filed with this Commission on September 11, 1990, the complainant alleged that the respondent failed to provide him with certain documents requested in his August 31 letter of request.

 

            3.  By letter dated August 31, 1990, the complainant requested thirty-three sets of records, which can be identified by the five following general categories:

 

                        a.  any and all written rules, regulations, or

    policies with respect to or affecting faculty         members in any way;

                        b.  written rules, regulations or policies defining

    the major refereed journals;

                        c.  any and all records concerning the complainant in

    any way or submitted or produced by the         complainant;

                        d.  all written administrative work as well as

    descriptions of administrative work assigned to              the complainant; and 

                        e.  all documents related to clinical activities

    performed by the complainant.

 

            4.  It is found that in the respondent's September 5, 1990 response to the complainant's request identified in paragraph 3,

 

Docket #FIC 90-337                           Page 2

 

above, the respondent claims that the documents sought by the complainant are either in the complainant's possession and/or are not in the respondent's possession.

 

            5.  At hearing the respondent claimed that the complainant received the relevant documents that were in the respondent's possession through discovery in a federal lawsuit.

 

            6.  It is found that prior to the complaint being filed in this matter, the respondent indicated to the complainant that in reviewing the complainant's personnel file, it appeared to the respondent that "over the past 10 years [the complainant] has had what seems to be unusual difficulty in getting along with three different department heads."

 

            7.  It is also found that the complainant was only provided with documentation concerning difficulty with one individual rather than three individuals.

 

            8.  It is accordingly concluded that the complainant has reason to believe that he may not have received all documentation he requested from the respondent.

 

            9.  At hearing, the respondent claimed in summary that he does not have control over or custody of every document requested by the complainant and took the position that he should not be required to collect the data requested but rather that the individual(s) in possession of any such document(s) should be specified before such documents must be produced.

 

            10.  It is found that the respondent serves as Chief Executive Officer of the University of Connecticut Medical School.

 

            11.  It is accordingly concluded that the departments that constitute the medical school are accountable ultimately to the respondent as Chief Executive Officer.

 

            12.  It is concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S. by failing to arrange prompt access to the University's records for the complainant.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

 

            1.  The respondent shall forthwith direct the various medical school departments and any other administrative entities within the medical school to produce for the complainant any documentation that may exist at his medical school responsive to the complainant's requests identified in his letter of August 31, 1990.

 

Docket #FIC 90-337                           Page 3

 

            2.  For any such documents that are not obtainable through the medical school, the respondent shall identify those documents listed in the August 31 request in a written statement or letter to the complainant.

 

            3.  The Freedom of Information Commission reminds the dean that he is ultimately responsible for prompt compliance with all freedom of information requests to the medical schools.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 13, 1991.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 90-337                           Page 4

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

 

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

RICHARD R. LINDQUIST

Pathology Department

Room L1017

Uconn Health Center

Farmington, CT 06032

 

DEAN, MEDICAL SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH CENTER

c/o William H. Kleinman

Assistant Attorney General

Uconn Health Center

Room LM068

Farmington, CT 06032

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission