The Plain Meaning Rule And The FOI Exemption For Homicide PhotographsPosted: May 25, 2014 Filed under: Appellate Law | Tags: 1-2z, 13-311, favish, homicide photographs, perkins, Sandy Hook 2 Comments
This post is about how General Statutes section 1-2z, which codifies the “plain meaning rule” of statutory interpretation, can lead to judicial interpretations of statutes that are completely at odds with what everyone knows the legislature actually intended when passing a law. To illustrate my point, I examine legislation enacted in 2013 concerning homicide photographs.
The “Perkins” Case And The “Legimate Public Concern” TestPosted: March 25, 2014 Filed under: Appellate Law | Tags: favish, freedom of information, invasion of privacy, legitimate matter of public concern, perkins 2 Comments
If you are a CT-N junkie like me, or have been following reports in other media outlets concerning proposed legislation that would restrict access under the state Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) to crime scene photographs and 911 calls, you’ve probably heard many references to two court cases, one called “Perkins,” the other called “Favish.” The two cases establish different legal standards for determining when the public disclosure of a government document would constitute an invasion of someone’s personal privacy. In fact, Don DeCesare, the co-chairman of the Task Force on Victim Privacy and the Public’s Right to Know, jokingly said in testimony before a legislative committee two weeks ago that he wished he had never heard of those two cases. (They were discussed ad nauseam during task force meetings.)