NJ Seal
State of NJ - Government Records Council Email Grc

2003-127

- Final Decision
- Findings and Recommendations of Executive Director

Final Decision

Jann M. Giacoboni,
Complainant
v.

Administrative Office of the Courts,
Custodian of Record

Complaint No. 2003-127

Decision Issued: February 18, 2004
Decision Effective: February 28, 2004

At its February 10, 2004 public meeting, the Government Records Council ("Council") considered the February 2, 2004 Findings and Recommendations of Executive Director and all related documentation submitted by the parties. The Council voted to adopt the entirety of said Findings and Recommendations. The Council dismissed the complaint finding that The GRC lacks jurisdiction over this matter and the case should be dismissed.

Vincent P. Maltese, Chairman
Government Records Council

I attest the foregoing is a true and accurate record of the Government Records Council.

Virginia Hook, Secretary
Government Records Council

Return to Top

Findings and Recommendations of Executive Director

GRC Complaint No. 2003-127

Jann M. Giacoboni
Complainant
v.
Administrative Office of the Courts
Custodian of Records

Relevant Records Requested: "Judge’s calendars from ACMS and vacation, personal time for: Judge John B. Mariano September 2002, October 2002, November 2002 & December 2002, specifically 9//27/02, 11/22/02, 12/06/02, 12/20/02 & 12/23/02 Judge Michael J. Kassel - March 7, 2003. The Automated Case Management System (ACMS) has a calendar master. Please print for dates listed above."
Request made: July 1, 2003
Response made: No Response Provided
Custodian: Jane F. Castner, Assistant Director of Trial Court Services
GRC Complaint filed: October 1, 2003

Executive Director’s Recommendation

The requestor is seeking from the Automated Case Management System of the Administrative Office of the Courts ("AOC&") specific time records of two judges. Officials of the AOC have declined to produce the records based upon the allegation that OPRA does not apply to the records requested. An examination of OPRA confirms that the GRC lacks jurisdiction over the AOC.

The Acting Executive Director respectfully recommends the Council find that:

  1. The GRC lacks jurisdiction over this matter and the case should be dismissed.

Statement of Facts

October 1, 2003 - Denial of Access Complaint filed

The requestor filed a Denial of Access Complaint alleging that on July 1, 2003, a request was made to the Administrative Office of the Courts for "Judge’s calendars from ACMS and vacation, personal time for: Judge John B. Mariano September 2002, October 2002, November 2002 & December 2002, specifically 9//27/02, 11/22/02, 12/06/02, 12/20/02 & 12/23/02 Judge Michael J. Kassel - March 7, 2003. The Automated Case Management System (ACMS) has a calendar master. Please print for dates listed above." The requestor contended that no response was given to the request and that the requestor spoke to the "Jane Castner to no avail."

January 12, 2004 - Mediation Offered to the Parties

January 20, 2004 - Letter to GRC from Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Counsel

The AOC’s Counsel contended that OAC operates under the Judicial Branch and OPRA is inapplicable to the Judicial Branch and not subject to the disclosure provisions or other requirements of OPRA.

Legal Issues and Considerations

The requestor is seeking from the Automated Case Management System of the Administrative Office of the Courts ("AOC") specific time records of two judges. Officials of the AOC have declined to produce the records based upon the allegation that OPRA does not apply to the records requested. An examination of OPRA confirms that the GRC lacks jurisdiction over the AOC.[1]

Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(g), the GRC "shall not have jurisdiction over the Judicial or Legislative Branches of State Government or any agency, officer, or employee of those branches." The New Jersey Constitution of 1947 created a Judicial Branch of State government. N.J.S.A. Const. Art. 6, §2, ¶1. The constitution reserved for the State Supreme Court the authority and obligation to make rules governing the administration of all courts in the State. N.J.S.A. Const. Art. 6, §2, ¶3. This provision has been interpreted to allocate to the Supreme Court full power and plenary authority regarding all matters touching the Administration of the court system of New Jersey. Passaic County Probation Officers’ Association v. County of Passaic, 73 N.J. 247, 252-253 (1977).

The AOC is part of the Judicial Branch of the State government. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the Administrative Director and Deputy Administrative Director of the ACO. N.J.S.A. 2A:12-1. The AOC is authorized "to develop and operate an automated data processing system that allows the public to access court information and to file court documents, pursuant to such directives, rules and regulations as the Supreme Court may adopt. N.J.S.A. 2B:1-4(a). The Supreme Court has adopted R. 1:38 to regulate access to court records.

In conclusion, not only does plain statutory language exclude judicial entities and employees from the scope of OPRA, but also, an alternative scheme for regulating access to judicial records exists. The GRC lacks jurisdiction over this matter, and Complaint No. 2003-127 must be dismissed.

Conclusion

The Acting Executive Director respectfully recommends the Council find that:

  1. The GRC lacks jurisdiction over this matter and the case should be dismissed.

_______________________

Paul F. Dice

Acting Executive Director

Government Records Council

Dated: February 2, 2004



[1] The GRC also appears to lacks jurisdiction over this complaint because the requestor has failed to supply with her appeal a copy of a written request to the custodian for the documents sought, as required by N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g).

Return to Top