← Back to Search
Justice Ainooson v. Plymouth County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20201353)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond · Filed 08-11-2020
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20201353 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Justice Ainooson concerning records held by Plymouth County District Attorney's Office, opened 08-11-2020. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20201353
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Justice Ainooson
- Date Opened
- 08-11-2020
- Date Closed
- 08-25-2020
- Date Request Submitted
- 07-17-2020
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 25, 2020 SPR20/1353 Keith Garland, Esq. Records Access Officer Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office 166 Main Street Brockton, MA 02301 Dear Attorney Garland: I have received the petition of Justice Ainooson appealing the nonresponse of the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on July 27, 2020, Mr. Ainooson requested various categories of records concerning two identified detective sergeants. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507,511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. Subsequent to the intervention by a staff member of the Public Records Division, I learned that a response was provided on August 12, 2020. In an email to this office dated August 25, 2020 you state, “[t]he Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office did not receive that request until July 27, 2020. I personally did not receive the request until August 5, 2020. I mailed a written response to the individual on August 12, 2020.” One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us SPR20/1353 Keith Garland, Esq. Page 2 August 25, 2020 Conclusion In light of the Office’s August 12th response, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Mr. Ainooson may appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Justice Ainooson