Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

VINCENT M. VALVO ET AL. v. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION ET AL. (SC 18283)
Rogers, C. J., and Norcott, Katz, Palmer, Vertefeuille, Zarella and McLachlan, Js. Argued September 24, 2009--officially released January 26, 2010

Daniel J. Klau, with whom was Justin R. Clark, for the appellants (plaintiffs). Martin R. Libbin, deputy director of legal services, for the appellee (defendant chief court administrator). Victor Perpetua, appellate attorney, for the appellee (named defendant).

Opinion

ROGERS, C. J. The plaintiffs, Vincent M. Valvo and the Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information, filed a complaint with the named defendant, the freedom of information commission (commission), after the defendant chief court administrator of the judicial branch of the state of Connecticut (chief court administrator), denied their request pursuant to the freedom of information act (act), General Statutes

Download Valvo v. Freedom of Information Commission.pdf

Connecticut Law