The requestor challenged the custodian on the purposes for the redactions. The custodian provided an invoice with redactions intended to protect attorney-client privileged communications. This complaint involves a request for a copy of a recent invoice to NJIT from outside counsel. Request granted with redactions: July 8, 2002 Relevant Record(s) Requested: Most recent attorney's bill or invoice from an outside private attorney hired by New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT)Ĭustodian: Holly Stern, Associate General Counsel and Assistant Vice President, for Marlene Waltz, Custodian (Consolidating and Amending Findings and Recommendations of March 13, 2003) Return to Top Consolidating and Amending Findings and Recommendations
I attest the foregoing is a true and accurate record of the Government Records Council: The Council hereby denies the requester's application for attorney's fees and dismisses the Complaint.Ī copy of this Decision shall be provided to the requestor, the custodian, and all counsel of record. 47:1A-1.1 and finds that the custodian did not waive the attorney-client privilege by failing to assert the privilege in its original response to the OPRA request. The Council considered the Complaint, the custodian's Statement of Information and attachments, submissions from the requester dated July 24, 2002, October 30, 2002, November 21, 2002, February 7 and 18, 2003, and March 6, 7,9,11 submissions from the custodian dated July 22 and 31, 2002, Februand Maand the Executive Director's Findings and Recommendations dated Maand June 12, 2003.īy affirmative vote of four council members on June 12, 2003, the Council adopts and incorporates herein the JFindings and Recommendations of the Executive Director and hereby finds that the custodian's redactions contain material subject to the attorney-client privilege that the redactions are lawful pursuant to N.J.S.A.
Redacted invoice how to#
The custodian's attorney asserts that the redactions concerned a telephone call to an unidentified person "made to determine the direction of a pending litigation matter" and that the communication would be "used to formulate strategic decision on how to proceed with an on-going appeal." ESX-L-422-98 but redacted information from the description of services claimed to be attorney-client privileged.
NJIT provided a copy of an invoice dated Jfor services rendered in connection with Haynes v. This complaint alleges a denial of access to a recent invoice from outside counsel to NJIT. Consolidating and Amending Findings and Recommendationsįindings and Recommendation of Executive DirectorĪt its Jpublic meeting, the Government Records Council considered Complaint #2002-35 filed pursuant to the Open Public Records Act (OPRA), N.J.S.A.
0 kommentar(er)
