Narrative Opinion Summary
The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Stuart Cohen, issued an order on October 20, 1995, granting the respondent's motion to dismiss the petitioner’s Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) application. This application challenged the denial of access to DD5 reports and a police officer's memo book. The dismissal was affirmed unanimously and without costs. The court referenced its previous decision in *Matter of Scott v Chief Medical Examiner of City of New York*, establishing that DD5 reports and police officer memo books are exempt from disclosure under FOIL. Additional supporting cases cited include *Matter of Johnson v New York City Police Dept.* and *Matter of Gould v New York City Police Dept.* The court explicitly declined to follow contrary rulings in *Mitchell v Slade* and *Matter of Laureano v Grimes*. The decision was concurred by Justices Murphy, Sullivan, Rosenberger, Rubin, and Nardelli.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Lower Court's Dismissalsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the dismissal of the FOIL application without costs, adhering to established precedent.
Reasoning: The dismissal was affirmed unanimously and without costs.
Exemption of DD5 Reports and Memo Books under FOILsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied the precedent that DD5 reports and police officer memo books are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Law.
Reasoning: The court referenced its previous decision in Matter of Scott v Chief Medical Examiner of City of New York, establishing that DD5 reports and police officer memo books are exempt from disclosure under FOIL.
Precedential Authority in FOIL Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court supported its decision by citing previous cases that uphold the exemption of certain records from FOIL, thereby reinforcing the application of precedent in such matters.
Reasoning: Additional supporting cases cited include Matter of Johnson v New York City Police Dept. and Matter of Gould v New York City Police Dept.
Rejection of Contrary Rulingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court explicitly chose not to follow contrary decisions from other cases, thus maintaining consistency with its established rulings.
Reasoning: The court explicitly declined to follow contrary rulings in Mitchell v Slade and Matter of Laureano v Grimes.