PASHMAN STEIN

A Professional Corporation
Court Plaza South
21 Main Street, Suite 100
Hackensack, NJ 07601
(201) 488-8200
CJ GRIFFIN (#031422009)
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Harry Scheeler
HARRY SCHEELER,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF NEW J ERSEY OFFICE OF THE
GOVERNOR and
J OHN DOE, in his/her capacity as Records
Custodian for the Office of the Governor,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW J ERSEY
LAW DIVISION: MERCER COUNTY
DOCKET NO.:
Civil Action
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Harry Scheeler, through hisundersigned counsel, Pashman Stein, A Professional
Corporation, complains against the Defendantsas follows:
1. This is a summary action alleging violation of the New J ersey Open Public
Records Act, N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1, et seq., (OPRA) and the common law right of access to public
records, seeking records from the State of New J ersey Office of the Governor.
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Harry Scheeler is an open government activist and aformer resident of
Woodbine, New J ersey. Mr. Scheeler presently lives in North Carolina.
3. Defendant State of New J ersey Office of the Governor (Defendant or
Governors Office) is a public agency formed under the laws of New J ersey, with its primary
2
place of business at P.O. Box 001, Trenton, New J ersey 08625-0001. The Governors Officeis a
public agency as the term is defined by OPRA, N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1.1.
4. Defendant J ohn Doe is the records custodian for the Defendant Governors
Office.
5. The Governors Office ma[kes], maintain or ke[eps] on file, or receive[s] in
the course of . . . its official business government records, and is thereby subject to the New
J ersey Open Public Records Act, N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1 to -13.
VENUE
6. Venue is properly laid in Mercer County because Defendant Governors Officeis
located in Mercer County and because the cause of action arose in Mercer County. R. 4:3-2(a).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7. On or about September 2, 2014, Mr. Scheeler submitted a request, pursuant to
OPRA and the common law right of access, for numerous government records relating to
Governor Christies town hall meetings and communications with members of the press.
8. Routinely, Governor Christie holds town hall meetings across the state and asks
participants and members of the press to RSVP via e-mail, though an RSVP is not required.
9. On September 10, 2014, Mr. Scheeler received a letter from the Governors
Officein response to his OPRA request. That letter statedas follows:
. . . With respect to your request for a [c]opy of all communications with
members of the press from 9/1/13 until 8/11/14, please be advised that
your request is overbroad and unclear, and is therefore invalid under
OPRA. The Appellate Division has stated that OPRA requires a party
requesting access to a public record to specifically describe the document
sought, Gannett N.J . Partners, L.P. v. County of Middlesex, 379 N.J .
Super. 205, 212 (App. Div. 2005), so that the records may be readily and
reasonably identified within the short time frame within which
government custodians must respond. Bent v. Twp. of Stafford Police
Dept, 381 N.J . Super. 30, 36-37 (App. Div. 2005). As such, a proper
3
request under OPRA must identify with reasonable clarity those
documents that are desired, and a party cannot satisfy this requirement by
simply requesting all of an agencys documents. Id. at 37; see also
Spectraserv, Inc. v. Middlesex County Util. Auth., 416 N.J . Super. 565,
576 (App. Div. 2010); MAG Entmt, LLC v. Div. of Alcoholic Beverage
Control, 375 N.J . Super. 534, 549 (App. Div. 2005). Moreover, OPRA
does not require that custodians conduct additional research when
responding to OPRA requests. Seeid. at 546-49.
With respect to your request for a [c]opy of all governor RSVP lists from
town hall meetings, please be advised that to the extent records exist,
these records are exempt from disclosure based upon the reasonable
expectation of privacy exception to OPRA. SeeExec. Order No. 26 2(c)
(McGreevey 2002).
[Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and accurate copy of the
September 10, 2014 OPRA Response.]
10. Mr. Scheelers request for a [c]opy of all communications with members of the
press from 9/1/13 until 8/11/14 enables the Defendants to readily and reasonably identify the
records sought, and does not require additional research by the custodian. There is therefore no
lawful basis for withholding these records.
11. Further, there is no lawful basis for withholding access to documents pursuant to
Mr. Scheelers request for [c]opy of all governor RSVP lists form [sic] town hall meetings,
including press that responded. Contrary to Defendants assertion, such documents are not
subject to the reasonable expectation of privacy exception to OPRA.
12. To date, Mr. Scheeler has received no records from Defendants in response to this
OPRA Request.
13. Defendant has thereforeviolated OPRA by not producing all records responsive
to Mr. Scheelers OPRA request.
4
FIRST COUNT
(Violation of OPRA)
14. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in the
preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth at length herein.
15. Pursuant to N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1, all government records must be readily
accessible to the citizens of this State unless specifically exempted by law.
16. Plaintiff submitted a valid request pursuant to OPRA, N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq.
17. The requested records are government records because they were made,
maintainedor kept on file, or receivedin the course of . . . [the Governors Offices] official
business. N.J .S.A. 47:1A-1.1.
18. The requested records are not subject to any exemption under OPRA.
19. The records requested, therefore, should have been produced within seven
business days in the medium requested by Plaintiff.
20. Accordingly, as demonstrated above, Defendants violated OPRA by:
a. Failing to provide access to the requested public records as soon as possible,
but not later than seven business days after receiving the request, in violation
of N.J .S.A. 47:1A-5(i);
b. Failing to provide a lawful basis for denying access to government records, in
violation of N.J .S.A. 47:1A-5(g);
c. Failing to prove that the denial of access is authorized by law, in violation of
N.J .S.A. 47:1A-6; and
d. Knowingly and willfully denying access to public records, as per N.J .S.A.
47:1A-11(a).
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants:
5
(a) Declaring said actions of Defendants to be in violation of OPRA, N.J .S.A. 47:1A-
1 et seq. by failing to grant access to the requested records, as required by OPRA;
(b) Directing Defendants to release un-redacted versions of requested records to
Plaintiffs forthwith; Alternatively, if the Court believes that any information is
exempt from public access, Plaintiff respectfully asks the Court to review the
document(s) in camera and then require Defendants to delete or excise from the
records the portion(s) which are exempt from public access and promptly permit
access to the remainder of the public record;
(c) Directing Defendants to conduct a further search of its email system and files for
responsive records;
(d) Ordering Defendants to preserve the requested recordspending resolution of these
proceedings or as otherwise required by law;
(e) Awarding counsel fees and costs pursuant to N.J .S.A. 47:1A-6; and
(f) For such other relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.
SECOND COUNT
(Common Law Right of Access)
21. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in the
preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth at length herein.
22. The public enjoys a vested common law right of access to public records
generated or maintained by public entities. See, e.g., Keddie v. Rutgers, 148 N.J . 36 (1997); S.
J ersey Publing Co. v. N.J . Expway Auth., 124 N.J . 478 (1991).
23. Defendants generate and/or maintain the requested public records, which are
necessary to be kept in the discharge of a duty imposed by law. S. J ersey Publishing Co., 124
6
N.J . at 487; N.J .S.A. 10:4-14 (requiring each public body to maintain reasonably
comprehensible minutes of all its meetings).
24. There is a strong public interest in favor of disclosure of the requested
information, and there is no overriding, countervailing interest in confidentiality of these records.
25. Plaintiff and publics need for access to these records is greater than the
Defendants need for secrecy.
26. Defendants failure to disclose the requested records violated Plaintiffs common
law right of access to public records.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants:
(a) Declaring said actions of Defendantsto be unlawful and invalid;
(b) Directing Defendants to release the requested recordsto Plaintiff forthwith;
(c) Awarding counsel fees and costs; and
(d) Grantingsuch other relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.
PASHMAN STEIN
A Professional Corporation,
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Harry Scheeler
Dated: October 21, 2014 By: ____________________________
CJ GRIFFIN, ESQ.
7
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO R. 4:5-1
Plaintiff, by hisattorney, hereby certifiesthat the matter in controversy is not the subject
of any other action pending in any Court and is likewise not the subject of any pending
arbitration proceeding. Plaintiff further certifiesthat hehasno knowledge of any contemplated
action or arbitration regarding the subject matter of this action and that Plaintiff isnot aware of
any other parties who should be joined in this action.
PASHMAN STEIN
A Professional Corporation,
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Harry Scheeler
Dated: October 21, 2014 By: _____________________________
CJ GRIFFIN, ESQ.
8
VERIFICATION
Harry Scheeler, of full age, deposes and says:
1. I am a citizen of the State of New J ersey, Plaintiff in the foregoing Verified
Complaint.
2. I have read the Verified Complaint. The allegations of the Verified Complaint
contained in Paragraphs2, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 12are true. The said Verified Complaint is made in
truth and good faith and without collusion, for the causes set forth herein.
3. All documents attached to the Verified Complaint and Brief are true copies and
have not been redacted, changed, modified, adjusted or otherwise altered in any manner by me or
my agentsunless so stated.
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the
foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
________________________________
HARRY SCHEELER
Dated: October 21, 2014