Corri Hopkins v. Massachusetts Department of Transportation (SPR 20251470)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 9, 2025 SPR25/1468; SPR25/1469; SPR25/1470; SPR25/1471 William J. Doyle, Esq. Records Access Officer Massachusetts Department of Transportation 10 Park Plaza, Suite 3510 Boston, MA 02116 Dear Attorney Doyle: I have received the petition of Attorney Corri A. Hopkins, of Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, appealing the responses of the Department of Transportation (Department) to multiple requests for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). SPR25/1468 On May 3, 2025, Attorney Hopkins requested “any Immediate Threat Report or citation, and associated notes (including fax cover sheets), regarding an event involving a motor vehicle registered to [a named individual] (Crash No. 5066898), which occurred on 1/29/2022 in Canton, MA.” The Department responded on May 14, 2025, citing Exemptions (a) and (f) for withholding responsive records, and assigned reference number P000929-050325 to this request. SPR25/1469 On March 23, 2025, Attorney Hopkins requested the following: “[t]he below categories all relate to [an identified] MassDOT Crash Number…” [1] Any crash report, including but not limited to the Fatal Accident Notification Report[;] [2] All versions of the above report(s)[;] [3] All notes associated with the report(s), including but not limited to all related 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

William J. Doyle, Esq. SPR25/1468; SPR25/1469; Page 2 SPR25/1470; SPR25/1471 June 9, 2025 fax cover sheets[;] [4] All email communications between the RMV and the requesting agency regarding the report(s) or the Event[;] [5] Immediate Threat Report[;] [6] All versions of the above report[;] [7] All notes associated with this report, including but not limited to all related fax cover sheets[;] [8] All email communications between the RMV and the requesting agency regarding the report or the Event[;] [9] All citation data related to the Event, including the citation itself[;] [10] All notes associated with the citation, including but not limited to all related fax cover sheets[;] [11] All email communications between the RMV and the requesting agency regarding the citation[;] [12] All email communications between the RMV and the Merit Rating Board regarding the citation[;] [13] Any response to the foregoing requests should include (but not be limited to) all records available (1) in the RMV Crash Records reporting system and (2) in the “Atlas” reporting system, to the extent that any such records exist.” This request was the subject of a previous petition from the Department. See SPR25/0947 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 10, 2025). In my April 10th determination, I declined to opine on the Department’s fee petition in light of pending litigation. Subsequently, the Department responded to Attorney Hopkins on May 14, 2025, citing Exemptions (a) and (f) for withholding responsive records, and assigned reference number P000624-032325 to this request. SPR25/1470 On May 3, 2025, Attorney Hopkins requested “[a]ny Fatal Accident Notification Report, and associated notes (including fax cover sheets), regarding an event involving a motor vehicle registered to [a named individual] (Crash No. 5066898), which occurred on 1/29/2022 in Canton, MA.”

William J. Doyle, Esq. SPR25/1468; SPR25/1469; Page 3 SPR25/1470; SPR25/1471 June 9, 2025 The Department responded on May 14, 2025, citing Exemptions (a) and (f) for withholding responsive records, and assigned reference number P000928-050325 to this request. SPR25/1471 On May 3, 2025, Attorney Hopkins requested “non-privileged emails regarding an event involving a motor vehicle registered to [a named individual] (Crash No. 5066898), which occurred on 1/29/2022 in Canton, MA.” The Department responded on May 14, 2025, citing Exemptions (a) and (f) for withholding responsive records, and assigned reference number P000930-050325 to this request. Unsatisfied with the Department’s responses, Attorney Hopkins petitioned this office, and these appeals, SPR25/1468, SPR25/1469, SPR25/1470, and SPR25/1471 were opened as a result. 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 agency or municipality 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. If there are any fees associated with a response, a written good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The Department’s May 14th Responses In each of its May 14, 2025 response, the Department cites Chapter 81 of the Acts of 2022, the Work and Family Mobility Act (“WFMA”), as it operates through Exemptions (a) of the Public Records Law, and also Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law for withholding responsive records See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a), (f).

William J. Doyle, Esq. SPR25/1468; SPR25/1469; Page 4 SPR25/1470; SPR25/1471 June 9, 2025 Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Attorney Hopkins contends that “the testimony, rulings, and facts underlying the related action, Commonwealth v. Karen Read, 22CR00117 (Norfolk), demonstrate that neither “Exemption F” nor the WMFA provide a valid basis for withholding materials sought by [the four requests].” Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: The Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: The public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. This office has reviewed the trial court’s docket and verified that criminal litigation, relating to the records at issue in Attorney Hopkins’ requests, is active and ongoing in the Norfolk Superior Court. See Commonwealth v. Karen Read, (Norfolk Superior Court, Docket No. 2282-CR-00117). In light of the pending matter, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). It should be noted that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Corri A. Hopkins, Esq.