The Connecticut Appellate Court upheld a lower court’s finding that certain redacted information on attorney billing records in the midst of a harassment investigation may be exempt from disclosure, but remanded the case to determine whether the potential disclosure would constitute an invasion of privacy.

The consolidated cases, Clerk of the Common Council v. Freedom of Information Commission and Sebastian Giuliano v. Freedom of Information Commission, arise out of an investigation by the city of Middletown into alleged misconduct by its former mayor and the city’s refusal to provide unredacted records, claiming they were not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, General Statutes §1-200, according to the appellate court’s opinion that was officially released Tuesday.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]