2004-61

Final Decision

This is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey within forty-five (45) days. Information about the appeals process can be obtained from the Appellate Division Clerk’s Office, Hughes Justice Complex, 25 W. Market St., PO Box 006, Trenton, NJ 08625-0006.

Final Decision Rendered by the
Government Records Council
On The 8^th Day of July, 2004

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 the Executive Director

Relevant Records Requested: Any records of the Complainant, any records on Mark C. Rathbun and also the name Mark Rothschild, any records of Scientology or Church of Scientology, any records on their deceased founder L. Ron Hubbard and any records on the former President Dwight David Eisenhower
Custodian: Kathleen Wiechnik, Department of Corrections
Request Made: October 21, 2003[1]
Response Made: November 12, 2003
GRC Complaint Filed: May 3, 2004

Recommendations of Executive Director
The Executive Director respectfully recommends that the Council dismiss the case because the custodian submitted a legal certification stating that the Department of Corrections (DOC) does not have any records responsive to the request.

Background

The Complainant filed a Denial of Access complaint because she does not believe that an adequate search for records was conducted. However, the Custodian and the Complainant exchanged several E-mails regarding the request and how the search was conducted. Also, the Custodian did provide the Complainant with one record.

Complainant:

The Complainant filed a Denial of Access complaint alleging that the Department of Corrections did not perform an adequate search for the records.

Custodian:

The Custodian’s Counsel attached to the Statement of Information several E-mails regarding the request. In the correspondence, she explains to the Complainant the systems used and that other units outside of the Government Records Unit have searched for the records. She also submitted legal certification to the Government Records Council certifying that the DOC does not have any records responsive to the request.

While the Custodian was performing the search for the requested records, she did obtain a record on Mark H. Rathbum, however she didn’t find anything for a Mark C. Rathbun. She did ask the Complainant if she would like that record. The complainant responded that she would, and the Custodian sent the record to the Complainant. 

Analysis
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-6 the custodian has a burden of proving that, the denial of access, is authorized by law. The Custodian’s Counsel in the Statement of Information, and the Custodian in the Legal Certification, has met the burden of proving that the DOC does not have records responsive to the request.
Documents Reviewed

The following documents were reviewed in preparing the Findings and Recommendations for this case:

1. May 3, 2004 – Denial of Access Complaint
2. May 24, 2004 – Statement of Information (Inclusive of E-mail Correspondence from 10/21/2003 through April 28, 2004)

   The following information that was pertinent to the case was found in the E-mail correspondence:

   • Complainant’s Request
   • Response to Request
   • Complainant’s request for explanation of search
   • Custodian’s explanation of system used to conduct the search
   • Complainant’s request that more units be searched for information
   • Custodian’s response that other units were searched
3. June 3, 2004 – Custodian’s Legal Certification

The Council should dismiss the case because the Custodian has legally certified that the Department did not have records responsive to the request.

_________________________

Paul F. Dice
Executive Director
Government Records Council

July 2, 2004

Return to Top