Rivera filed suit claiming the right of access to the report in whole or in part, again under OPRA and the common law. The prosecutor and the city of Elizabeth, as intervenor, defended based on the personnel records exemption under § 10 of OPRA, the privacy interests of the complainants and witnesses, and the “chilling effect” release of that kind of information would have on future internal investigations.
The trial judge concluded that the complete internal affairs report should be provided in accordance with provisions of OPRA, subject to prior in camera review for redaction purposes. That ruling made it unnecessary for the court to reach the common law issue.
This content has been archived.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
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]
