how a City Government operates and the difficulty in getting minor documents.
Foil Requests By Martin McGloin, for the Bills the City Of Yonkers wants to keep secret. Please follow the trail to the end of this post. I for one would like to know what the City of Yonkers is hiding after 18 months of denials.
Please Click on the documents to enlarge:
From: XXXXXXXXXX@earthlink.net
To: FOIL@cityofyonkers.com
Cc: Rfreeman@dos.state.ny.us
Subject: Appeal the Denial Thacher , Proffit and Wood.
Date: Nov 8, 2006 3:30 PM
Mr. Frank Rubino
Office of the Corporation Counsel
City of Yonkers
City Hall
Yonkers, New York 10701
Re: Freedom of Information Law Appeal
Dear Mr. Rubino
I hereby appeal the denial of access regarding my request, which was made on
October 6th 2006, and sent to you Mr. Frank Rubino,Office of the Corporation Counsel, City of Yonkers, City Hall, Yonkers, New York 10701.
The records that were denied include F.O.I.L. Request for all bills and receipts
submitted to you by the law firm of Thacher, Proffit and Wood LLP, for the period
November 1st 2005 to October 6th 2006.
As required by the Freedom of Information Law, the head or governing body of
an agency, or whomever is designated to determine appeals, is required to respond
within 10 business days of the receipt of an appeal. If the records are denied on
appeal, please explain the reasons for the denial fully in writing as required by
law.
In addition, please be advised that the Freedom of Information Law directs
that all appeals and the determinations that follow be sent to the Committee on
Open Government, Department of State, 41 State Street, Albany, New York 12231.
Sincerely,
Martin McGloin
XX XXXXXX XXX,
Yonkers
New York XXXXXX
November 8th 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: XXXXXXXXXX@earthlink.net
To: frank.rubino@cityofyonkers.com
Cc: Rfreeman@dos.state.ny.us
Date: Feb 2, 2007 3:14 PM
Mr. Frank Rubino
Office of the Corporation Counsel
FOIL Appeals Officer
City of Yonkers
City Hall
Yonkers, New York 10701
February 2nd 2007
Dear, Mr Rubino,
please find below a copy my Law Appeal for all of the bills and receipts of the
the law firm Thacher, Proffit and Wood LLP, for the period
November 1st 2005 to October 6th 2006. This was e-mailed to your offices on November
8th 2006. To date I have not recieced a denial or access to these documents, pertaining
to this specific FOIL request.
I am writing to request that, since time has passed that you not only furnish me
the requested documents from the period originally requested but also all bills
and receipts of Thacher, Proffit and Wood LLP, for the period October 7th 2006 to
date, February 2nd 2007.
As required by the Freedom of Information Law, the head or governing body of
an agency, or whomever is designated to determine appeals, is required to respond
within 10 business days of the receipt of an appeal. If the records are denied on
appeal, please explain the reasons for the denial fully in writing as required by
law.
In addition, please be advised that the Freedom of Information Law directs
that all appeals and the determinations that follow be sent to the Committee on
Open Government, Department of State, 41 State Street, Albany, New York 12231.
Sincerely,
Martin McGloin
XX XXXXXX XXX,
Yonkers
New York XXXXXX
February 2 2007
Below sent to your offices on November 8th 2006
Mr. Frank Rubino
Office of the Corporation Counsel
City of Yonkers
City Hall
Yonkers, New York 10701
Re: Freedom of Information Law Appeal
Dear Mr. Rubino
I hereby appeal the denial of access regarding my request, which was made on
October 6th 2006, and sent to you Mr. Frank Rubino,Office of
the Corporation Counsel, City of Yonkers, City Hall, Yonkers, New York 10701.
The records that were denied include F.O.I.L. Request for all bills and receipts
submitted to you by the law firm of Thacher, Proffit and Wood LLP, for the period
November 1st 2005 to October 6th 2006.
As required by the Freedom of Information Law, the head or governing body of
an agency, or whomever is designated to determine appeals, is required to respond
within 10 business days of the receipt of an appeal. If the records are denied on
appeal, please explain the reasons for the denial fully in writing as required by
law.
In addition, please be advised that the Freedom of Information Law directs
that all appeals and the determinations that follow be sent to the Committee on
Open Government, Department of State, 41 State Street, Albany, New York 12231.
Sincerely,
Martin McGloin
XX XXXXXX XXX,
Yonkers
New York XXXXXXX
November 8th 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEBRA S. COHEN
Attorney at Law
470 MAMARONECK AVENUE SUITE 400
WHITE PLAINS, NEW YORK 10605
-----------------------------------
TELEPHONE: (914) 478-1623
FACSIMILE: (914) 693-8287
dsc9101@aol.com
February 12, 2007
Via certified mail & courtesy copy via fax (914)964-0563
Frank Rubino, Esq.
Corporation Counsel & FOIL Appeals Officer
City Hall
Yonkers, New York 10701
Re: FOIL Request of Martin McGloin for Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP records
Dear Mr. Rubino:
I am writing to you in your capacity as the Freedom of Information Law
(“FOIL”) appeals officer for the City of Yonkers on behalf of Mr. Martin
McGloin.
Mr. McGloin has asked for my assistance regarding his ongoing efforts to obtain
records of bills, expenses and receipts of the law firm of Thacher Proffit &
Wood LLP. His most recent correspondence to you was an e-mail dated February
2, 2007.
The basis given for the denial of access to these records is that “these
materials are prepared for active litigation and are withheld from disclosure
pursuant to Public Officers Law § 87(2)(a) in conjunction with CPLR §3101”.
Mr. McGloin has been advised by the City’s FOIL officer that “once the action
is finalized, you may send another request and it will be considered as a new
request.”
The City’s response seems unreasonable on at least two grounds. First, Mr.
McGloin has asked for “all legal bills, receipts and expenses” of Thacher
Proffitt & Wood LLP since November 1, 2005. He has not designated bills and
receipts in regard to a particular action. Therefore it is unreasonable to
require him to resubmit his FOIL request upon becoming aware of the
finalization of any particular action. More important, it is unreasonable for
the City to deny access on a basis that is contrary to numerous judicial
decisions, including the Court of Appeals. See inter alia, Farbman v. New York
City Health and Hospitals Corporation, 62 N.Y.2d 75 (1984); Matter of Priest v.
Hennessy, 51 N.Y.2d 62 (1980); Orange County Publications Inc. v. County of
Orange, 637 N.Y.S.2d 596 (S.Ct. Orange County 1995).
It is requested that Mr. McGloin immediately be provided all bills, expenses
and receipts of Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP from November 1, 2005 to the
present without any further action on his part required.
Thank you for your assistance in resolving this matter.
Very truly yours,
/s/
Debra S. Cohen
cc: New York State Committee on Open Government
DEBRA S. COHEN
Attorney at Law
470 MAMARONECK AVENUE SUITE 400
WHITE PLAINS, NEW YORK 10605
-----------------------------------
TELEPHONE: (914) 478-1623
FACSIMILE: (914) 693-8287
dsc9101@aol.com
February 28, 2007
Frank J. Rubino
Corporation Counsel
City Hall
Yonkers, New York 10701-3883
Re: FOIL Request of Martin McGloin for Thacher, Proffitt & Wood LLP records
Dear Mr. Rubino:
I write in response to your letter of February 26, 2007, regarding Martin McGloin’s appeal of the denial of his FOIL requests for legal invoices submitted by Thacher, Proffitt & Wood LLP to the City of Yonkers.
The cases you cite are inapplicable to the situation herein. Both Licensing Corporation of America v. National Hockey League Player Association, 153 Misc. 2d. 126, (S.Ct. New York County 1992) and De La Roche v. De La Roche, 209 A.D. 157 (1st Dept. 1994) address discovery requests for attorney invoices made by parties in the course of litigation. The Court of Appeals made it clear in Farbman v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corp., 62 N.Y.2d 69 (1984) that your argument that a statute limiting discovery in the course of litigation should be used to specifically exempt public records from disclosure under FOIL is without merit.
Contrary to your assertion, the cases I cited in my letter of February 12, 2007, are directly relevant to the issues confronting us. In particular, Orange County Publications v. County of Orange, 637 N.Y.S.2d 596 (S.Ct. Orange County 1995) provides a thoughtful analysis leading to the conclusion that, while there might be limited specific references in the invoices that may be properly withheld, wholesale denial of access to the invoices on a blanket assertion of attorney-client privilege or work product is unreasonable under FOIL.
Your offer to create new records by providing Mr. McGloin “a record of the fees paid to Thacher Proffit & Wood LLP” in lieu of the documents requested is noted but not acceptable. He seeks the actual invoices. If they are provided, with what appear to be reasonable redactions to descriptive information you believe constitute proper exemptions under FOIL, Mr. McGloin will be happy to consider foregoing taking further action.
Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss the matter further. I am hopeful we can resolve it without any additional undue burden on the City or Mr. McGloin.
Very truly yours,
Debra S. Cohen
cc: New York State Committee on Open Government
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment