Marino v. Morgenthau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marino v. Morgenthau

1 A.D.3d 275, 769 N.Y.S.2d 10, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12498

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 25, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.3d 275 (Marino v. Morgenthau) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Marino v. Morgenthau, 1 A.D.3d 275, 769 N.Y.S.2d 10, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12498 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stallman, J.), entered on or about January 27, 2003, which denied petitioner’s Freedom of Information Law application, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Eetitioner’s request to respondent District Attorney was for “ ‘a reasonably detailed current list by subject matter, of all records in the possession of the agency, whether or not available under this article,’ ” quoting Eublic Officers Law § 87 (3) (c).

[276]*276Respondent’s response was a list enumerating 215 types of documents. Dissatisfied, petitioner brought the instant CPLR article 78 proceeding, claiming that the list is incomplete because it does not contain “all prosecution case file(s)” and “each and every record contained in each prosecution case file(s).” According to petitioner, the list “should have been updated daily” to reflect particular reports, statements, arrests and indictments as they occur. The proceeding was properly dismissed. Respondent’s subject matter list need not refer to each and every document his agency maintains, but only to categories of records in detail sufficient to permit an applicant to “identify the category of records that may include the records sought” (Matter of Allen v Strojnowski, 129 AD2d 700, 701 [1987], appeal dismissed and lv denied 70 NY2d 871 [1987]). Concur—Buckley, PJ., Tom, Ellerin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stallman, J.), entered on or about January 27, 2003, which denied petitioner’s Freedom of Information Law application, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Eetitioner’s request to respondent District Attorney was for “ ‘a reasonably detailed current list by subject matter, of all records in the possession of the agency, whether or not available under this article,’ ” quoting Eublic Officers Law § 87 (3) (c).

[276]*276Respondent’s response was a list enumerating 215 types of documents. Dissatisfied, petitioner brought the instant CPLR article 78 proceeding, claiming that the list is incomplete because it does not contain “all prosecution case file(s)” and “each and every record contained in each prosecution case file(s).” According to petitioner, the list “should have been updated daily” to reflect particular reports, statements, arrests and indictments as they occur. The proceeding was properly dismissed. Respondent’s subject matter list need not refer to each and every document his agency maintains, but only to categories of records in detail sufficient to permit an applicant to “identify the category of records that may include the records sought” (Matter of Allen v Strojnowski, 129 AD2d 700, 701 [1987], appeal dismissed and lv denied 70 NY2d 871 [1987]). Concur—Buckley, PJ., Tom, Ellerin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.3d 275, 769 N.Y.S.2d 10, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marino-v-morgenthau-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack