2nd request for LYNN HEYERS emails
Dear Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office,
This is a request for public records made under OPRA and the common law right of access. I am not required to fill out an official form. Please acknowledge receipt of this message.
Records requested:
I am requesting ALL EMAILS to and from Prosecutor Lynn Heyer with regards to defendant Jason Samaritano. I am his wife and I am requesting these on his behalf and as per OPRA. The timeframe for these emails would be from 2019 to present.
The following case law provides that these government emails are allowed to be requested and received:
Meyers v. Borough of Fairlawn, GRC Complaint
No. 2005-127 (May 2006) – GRC held that emails sent or received on Mayor’s private e-mail
account were government records because
Mayor conducted official business in said emails and Must contain 3 characteristics pursuant to Elcavage
v. West Milford Township (Passaic), GRC Complaint
No. 2009-08 (April 2010):
1. Content and/or subject
2. Specific date or range of dates
3. Sender and/or recipient
My previous request was wrongfully denied in part under false pretenses citing case North Jersey Media Group Inc. v. Township of Lyndhurst. It clearly states in that case the following: "The Court made clear that, for records to be denied access under the ongoing investigation exception or the common law, public agencies must provide "specific reasons" why release would be harmful to the public interest that apply to that specific case, and not generic reasons that would apply to all cases." Since your agency HAS NOT provided a specific reason why the release would be harmful to the public interest it is then restricted from such exemption.
So I AGAIN request the information that I previously requested and look forward to your prompt response.
Regards,
Erin Samaritano on behalf of my husband Jason Samaritano
Good Morning,
Please be advised that we are in receipt of your OPRA and common law records request. You will receive a response to your request by the end of next week.
Respectfully,
Custodian of Records
Dear Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Open Public Records Act reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office's handling of my OPRA request '2nd request for LYNN HEYERS emails'.
Please conduct a thorough review and respond accordingly. It has been almost a year and I feel that information is being deliberately withheld. I appreciate any cooperation you can provide to me.
A full history of my OPRA request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://opramachine.com/request/2nd_requ...
Yours faithfully,
Erin
Good morning,
Attached please find the response to your request dated July 2, 2023.
Matthew T. Mills
Assistant Prosecutor
Atlantic County Prosecutor’s Office
4997 Unami Boulevard
Mays Landing, NJ 08330
(609) 909-7688
Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including all attachments,
from Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office contains information, which is
CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. The information is intended only
for the use of the individual named above and may not be disseminated to
any other party without the Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office written
permission. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or
agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure, distribution,
copying or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
emailed information is strictly prohibited.
Dear Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Open Public Records Act reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office's handling of my OPRA request '2nd request for LYNN HEYERS emails'.
On June 20, 2017, the New Jersey Supreme Court in Paff v. Galloway Township expanded the scope of OPRA to require public entities to produce information relating to the “sender,” “recipient,” “date,” and “subject” of emails even if that means the agency would need to create a new document.
The Supreme Court viewed the issue as one of statutory interpretation and agreed with the trial court that OPRA defines a “government record” as “information stored or maintained electronically.” The Court further reasoned that the Legislature did not define government records as only documents or files maintained electronically – rather the key word is information. Specifically, the Supreme Court found:
A document is nothing more than a compilation of information — discrete facts and data. By OPRA’s language, information in electronic form, even if part of a larger document, is itself a government record. Thus, electronically stored information extracted from an email is not the creation of a new record or new information; it is a government record.
A full history of my OPRA request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://opramachine.com/request/2nd_requ...
Yours faithfully,
Erin