FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

John W. Pillar,

 

                                Complainant

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 95-60

 

Groton Town Attorney,

 

                                Respondent                          February 14, 1996

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on December 27, 1995, 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 dated March 2, 1995, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with any "notes, memos, memorandum or any other written material" related to the following time entries on the respondent's legal bill submitted to the town of Groton (hereinafter "town") for legal services at the billing rate of one hundred dollars per hour:

 

                12/10/94 telephone conference with Mayor            .20

                12/13/94 legal research re: citizen's petition     2.90

                12/14/94 telephone conference with Mayor            .20

                1/23/95  telephone conference with Mayor re: charge

                                    of bribery; office conference re: file     .70

                1/23/95  office conference re: file; research

                                    citizen's petition                                  .80

                1/24/95  telephone conference with mayor re: slander.20

                1/25/95  telephone conference - mayor, manager, clerk;

                                    research bribery & slander                2.90

 

The complainant also requested any additional material generated since January 25, 1995 pertaining to the above matters.

 

                3.  By letter dated March 9, 1995, the respondent informed the complainant that he had not searched his files for the requested records because his preliminary belief was that "such material, if any, [was] not available to [the complainant] under the [FOI] Act."

 

#FIC 95-60                                             Page 2

 

                4.  By letter dated March 13, 1995, and filed March 14, 1995, the complainant appealed to the Commission and alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by failing to comply with his request.

 

                5.  It is found that the respondent first searched his files for records responsive to the complainant's request in September of 1995, having received the Commission's notice of hearing and order to show cause for this matter.

 

                6.  It is found that the respondent searched two of his files for the requested records:  (1) file #1653, labeled "Groton miscellaneous"; and (2) a "legal opinions" file.

 

                7.  The respondent maintains that he has no records that are responsive to the complainant's request, and cannot recall seeing or creating any such records.

 

                8.  The respondent further maintains that even if such records did exist, they would be exempt from disclosure pursuant to the attorney-client privilege.

 

                9.  The Commission finds it incredible that nearly eight hours and eight hundred dollars worth of legal work was performed by the respondent on behalf of the town, without creating a single written record.

 

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

 

                1.  The respondent shall immediately conduct a thorough search of his files for any records responsive to the complainant's request.  If any records are located, they shall be provided to the complainant free of charge.  If no records are located, the respondent shall provide the complainant with a detailed affidavit stating: (a) the particulars of the search; and (b) whether any such documents ever existed, and if so, when and how they were destroyed.

 

                2.  Nothing in paragraph 1 of the order, above, shall be considered to deprive the respondent of any exemption to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 14, 1996.

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 95-60                                               Page 3

 

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:

John W. Pillar

P.O. Box 547

Groton, CT 06340

 

Groton Town Attorney

c/o  James F. Brennan, Esq.

Suisman, Shapiro, Wool, Brennan & Gray, P.C.

2 Union Plaza - Suite 200

P.O. Box 1591

New London, CT 06320

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission