FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Robert Fromer,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 91-274
Clerk, State of Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New London,
Respondent August 26, 1992
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 24, 1992, 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. By letter of complaint filed September 5, 1991, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that his request to hear a tape recording in the custody of the Clerk of the Superior Court had been denied.
2. It is found that the complainant by letter dated August 1, 1991 requested from the Chief Clerk of the Superior Court for the Judicial District of New London an opportunity to hear the tape recording of an August 31, 1990 hearing before Judge Burns in G.A. 10 to which he was a party.
3. It is found that the Chief Clerk denied the request by letter dated August 13, 1991.
4. In relevant part, 1-18a(a), G.S., defines public agency as "any judicial office, official or body or committee thereof but only in respect to its or their administrative functions."
5. Chapter 873 of the General Statutes provides that court clerks are officials of the superior court.
6. The Commission takes administrative notice of the fact that tape recordings of court proceedings are made principally for the purpose of creating transcripts, and that transcripts are created and maintained principally to ensure a fair and just trial, to provide a full record for appellate review, and for use in collateral proceedings.
Docket #FIC 91-274 Page 2
7. It is therefore concluded that a tape recording of a court proceeding is a matter involved in the adjudication of cases.
8. It is additionally concluded that the requested hearing tape is a record of a judicial official performing a non-administrative function, and is not subject to the disclosure provisions of 1-15 and 1-19, G.S.
9. The complainant also maintains that the denial of access to the tape denies his right of access to judicial proceedings and records as guaranteed by the First Amendment, pursuant to Globe Newspaper Co. v. Pokaski, 16 Med.L.Rptr. 1385 (1989), U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals.
10. It is concluded, however, that the Commission lacks jurisdiction to decide the complainant's constitutional claim.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The complaint is dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of August 26, 1992.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission
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:
Robert Fromer
281 Gardner Avenue, J4
New London, Ct 06320
Clerk, State of Connecticut,
Superior Court, Judicial District of New London
c/o Martin R. Libbin, Esq.
231 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, Ct 06106
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission