FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

           

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on March 8, 2011, 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 §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  By letter of complaint filed September 23, 2010, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent failed to comply with his request for certain records.

 

3.  It is found that the complainant made an August 30, 2010 request for (a) the results of any investigations conducted by the respondent concerning citizen complaints concerning State Marshals or the State Marshals Commission, and (b) all public correspondence received by the respondent concerning any State Marshal or the State Marshals Commission from 2006 to the present.

 

4.  Section 1-200(5), G.S., provides:

 

“Public records or files” means any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, or to which a public agency is entitled to receive a copy by law or contract under section 1-218, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.

 

5.  Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and every person shall have the right to (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours, (2) copy such records in accordance with subsection (g) of section 1-212, or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212….   

 

6. It is found that the respondent has no records responsive to that part of the request described in paragraph 3(a), above, for the results of investigations.

 

7.  It is concluded that the requested records described in paragraph 3(b), above, are public records within the meaning of §§1-200(5) and 1-210(a), G.S.

 

8. The respondent maintains that the records withheld from the complainant are exempt from disclosure pursuant to §35-42(c)(1) and (2), G.S.

 

9. Section 35-42(c)(1) and (2), G.S., provide in relevant part that disclosure is not required of:

 

(c) (1)All documentary material furnished to the Attorney General, his or her deputy or any assistant attorney general designated by the Attorney General, pursuant to a demand issued under subsection (a) of this section, shall be held in the custody of the Attorney General, or the Attorney General's designee, and shall not be available to the public. Such documentary material shall be returned to the person furnishing such documentary material upon the termination of the Attorney General's investigation or final determination of any action or proceeding commenced thereunder. (2) All documentary material or other information furnished voluntarily to the Attorney General, his or her deputy or any assistant attorney general designated by the Attorney General, for suspected violations of the provisions of this chapter, and the identity of the person furnishing such documentary material or other information, shall be held in the custody of the Attorney General, or the Attorney General's designee, and shall not be available to the public. Such documentary material or other information shall be returned to the person furnishing such documentary material or other information upon the termination of the Attorney General's investigation or final determination of any action or proceeding commenced thereunder.

 

10.  It is found that all of the records withheld from the complainant were “furnished voluntarily to the Attorney General, his or her deputy or any assistant attorney general designated by the Attorney General, for suspected violations of the provisions of this chapter [624, Connecticut Antitrust Act],” within the meaning of §35-42(c)(2), G.S., and therefore are exempt from disclosure.

 

11.  It is concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act as alleged.

 

 

 

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 10, 2011.

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

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:

 

Rick Morneau

399 Main Street

Portland, CT 06480

 

Attorney General, State of Connecticut,

Office of the Attorney General

C/o Philip Miller, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

55 Elm Street

Hartford, CT 06141

 

 

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2010-596FD/sw/8/18/2011