In the wake of nationwide protests stemming from the tragic death of George Floyd and the subsequent calls across the country to both defund police departments and reform their practices, access to real time information regarding police activities has rapidly gained momentum.
In a shift from past opinions, a recent Appellate Division decision provides municipalities and their police departments’ protection from Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”) litigation for certain records produced by police officers but ultimately maintained by the judiciary through an electronic system.
The biggest threat I have with my kids is to take away their phones. Now, apparently a New Jersey Mayor feels the same way, trying to confiscate phones during public meetings.
Public records requests remain a minefield of issues for both the custodian and the requestor. Custodians must follow a step-by-step process to ensure compliance with the law and requestors must be specific or they may not obtain the documents they seek.
George Morris and Daniel Davidow discuss another recent ruling by the NJ Supreme Court on OPRA, this time regarding police department documents.
Municipal and Government Associate Daniel A. Davidow discusses another court ruling involving OPRA and the difference between medical and incident reports.
OPRA Counsel George Morris explains the recent New Jersey Supreme Court refusal to hear an appellate court case on privacy concerns regarding public records.
Municipal and Government attorney Michael J. Coskey explains the recent NJ Supreme Court ruling on OPRA's privacy clause.
Yesterday, the New Jersey Appellate Division resolved the long-standing question of whether the Open Public Records Act only required responses to records requests from New Jersey residents.
Municipal and Government attorney, George Morris explains how to retain and destroy public records properly and avoid liability.