FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Edward L. Johnson, Jr. and
Connecticut Bar Association,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 89-13
Commissioner, State of
Connecticut Department of Revenue Services,
Respondent April
12, 1989
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on
February 21, 1989, at which time the complainants 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 dated
December 2, 1988 the complainants made a request of the respondent for an
alphabetized list of the names and mailing addresses of those attorneys who are
actively practicing law in the state of Connecticut, including those who are
active but exempt from taxation and those whom the respondent classifies as
"on hold." The complainants
seek neither taxpayer account numbers nor the status of individual accounts nor
any information pertaining to retired attorneys.
3. By letter dated
December 19, 1988 the respondent denied the complainants' request as set forth
in paragraph 2 of the findings, above.
4. By letter of
complaint filed with this Commission on January 10, 1989 the complainants
appealed the denial of their request.
5. The respondent
claims that the requested list is exempt from disclosure under §§1-19(a) and
1-19(b)(10), G.S., on the ground that §12-15(a), G.S., prohibits its
disclosure.
6. It is found that
an alphabetized list of the names and addresses of attorneys who pass the
Connecticut bar examination
Docket #FIC 89-13 Page
Two
is provided by the
Connecticut Bar Examining Committee, a judicial branch agency, to the Clerk of
the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Hartford, to designated
Superior Court Clerks in other counties, and to the respondent as a courtesy.
7. Administrative
notice is taken of the fact that the names and addresses of Connecticut
attorneys are available to the public from a number of sources including
general and specialized directories published by the Southern New England
Telephone Company, the Connecticut Bar Association, and Martindale and Hubbell.
8. It is found that
the attorney's occupational tax return used by the respondent requires the
individual filing the return to provide, among other things, his or her
address, his or her employer or firm name, and an answer to whether any of the
enumerated categories of tax exemptions apply to him or her.
9. It is also found
that it can be inferred from a completed attorney's occupational tax return
whether the individual filing the return is actively practicing law in
Connecticut.
10. It is further
found that the respondent maintains a computer data base containing the names
and addresses of Connecticut attorneys who have been mailed an occupational tax
return as well as those who have returned them. This data base is updated
periodically from sources other than tax returns, including lists of newly
admitted attorneys supplied by the Connecticut Bar Examining Committee and from
lists supplied by the complainant association.
11. §12-15(a), G.S. provides in pertinent part:
"The
commissioner or the commissioner's...agent...shall not make known in any manner
any information obtained by an investigation of records or equipment of any
person visited or examined in the discharge of official duty; or the amount or
source of income...or any particulars thereof set forth or disclosed in any
return, statement or report required to be filed with or submitted to the
commissioner...."
12. It is concluded
that to the extent the list sought by the complainants is derived exclusively
from information disclosed on the occupational tax return or any other
statement or report required to be filed with or submitted to the respondent,
such information is exempt from disclosure under §§1-19(a), 1-19(b)(10) and
12-15(a), G.S.
Docket #FIC 89-13 Page
Three
13. It is also
concluded, however, that to the extent the list sought by the complainants is
derived from sources other than those set forth in §12-15, G.S., and paragraph
12 of the findings, above, such information constitutes public records subject
to disclosure under §1-19(a), G.S.
14. It is found
that the respondent failed to prove that the requested list of attorneys was
derived exclusively from any of the sources set forth in §12-15, G.S., and
paragraph 12 of the findings, above.
15. Thus it is
concluded that the respondent violated §1-19(a), G.S., by failing to provide
the complainants with access to the requested list of attorneys and their
mailing addresses.
The following order by the
Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1. The respondent
forthwith shall provide the complainants with a list of attorneys as more
specifically described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above.
2. In complying
with paragraph 1 of this order, above, the respondent may charge the
complainants for the cost of formatting or programming the computer data base
in order to provide the list in alphabetical order as requested by the
complainants.
3. In complying with paragraph 1 of this order, above, the
respondent need not include any information that can be proven to have been
obtained exclusively from the sources identified in paragraph 12 of the
findings, above.
4. Although the Commission is without authority to order
disclosure of information exempt from disclosure under §12-15(a), G.S., the
Commission believes that neither this statute nor any other statute
contemplates withholding from the public any information that in fact is
already in the public domain and generally available from public agencies and
in public directories. Also, since the requested information in large part has
been disseminated in the past, and because there is no overriding tax or other
policy reason for nondisclosure, the Commission urges the respondent to
reconsider the decision to withhold this information.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission
at its regular meeting of April 12, 1989.
Karen
J. Haggett
Clerk
of the Commission