Have to goto Court in PA because Someone at Wendy's Saw my Firearm

[Fallschirjmäger]

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/2001fd/20010725/FIC1999-257R.htm
http://www.state.ct.us/foi/2001fd/20010725/FIC1998-380R.htm
My state's FOIA Act can apply to private companies which can be private property owners.
I think most states' FOIA Acts do so as well.

It pains me to have to point out that the - -
Executive Director, New Haven Development Corporation,
Connecticut Community Investment Corporation,
Technology Investment Fund, Incorporated,
New Haven Enterprise Development Corporation are all corporations and that the complaint against
Mayor John DeStefano, was in his position as a public agency, not as an individual citizen (first damn paragraph, sheesh.)

Further it pains me to have to point out that the
Director, Office of Business Development, City of New Haven;
New Haven Community Investment Corporation;
Technology Investment Fund;
New Haven Enterprise Corporation; and the
New Haven Investment Corporation are all public entities or corporations respectively and not individuals as well.


I can file a FOIA against the Sheriff's department to find out how many deputies they employ, but I can't file a FOIA request against David to find out how many bottles of booze he has (although I'm sure he's a non-drinkin' man). I'm reasonably sure I can't file a FOIA request with Colonel Sanders to demand he reveal how many buckets of chicken he's sold or with XYZ corporation to force them to reveal how much they are paying each of their executives so I can poach one of them for my mythological company.

 

[davidmcbeth]

It pains me to have to point out that the - -
Executive Director, New Haven Development Corporation,
Connecticut Community Investment Corporation,
Technology Investment Fund, Incorporated,
New Haven Enterprise Development Corporation are all corporations and that the complaint against
Mayor John DeStefano, was in his position as a public agency, not as an individual citizen (first damn paragraph, sheesh.)

Further it pains me to have to point out that the
Director, Office of Business Development, City of New Haven;
New Haven Community Investment Corporation;
Technology Investment Fund;
New Haven Enterprise Corporation; and the
New Haven Investment Corporation are all public entities or corporations respectively and not individuals as well.


I can file a FOIA against the Sheriff's department to find out how many deputies they employ, but I can't file a FOIA request against David to find out how many bottles of booze he has (although I'm sure he's a non-drinkin' man). I'm reasonably sure I can't file a FOIA request with Colonel Sanders to demand he reveal how many buckets of chicken he's sold or with XYZ corporation to force them to reveal how much they are paying each of their executives so I can poach one of them for my mythological company.

The private person must be found to be a quasi-agency or acting as such.

Very few private companies have had some of their records open for public inspection under FOIA Acts..but some have.

I doubt KFC / Wendy's etc would ever be subject to such record production unless a strange contract was made between a gov't agency and them.

 

[Grapeshot]

--snipped--
My state's FOIA Act can apply to private companies which can be private property owners.

I think most states' FOIA Acts do so as well.

The Pennsylvania Right to Know Act, also known as the Pennsylvania Sunshine Law, is a series of laws designed to guarantee that the public has access to public records of governmental bodies in Pennsylvania.
https://ballotpedia.org/Pennsylvania_Right_to_Know_Law


FOIA Overview & FAQs | Virginia Coalition for Open ...

www.opengovva.org/foia-overview-a-faqs

IA is a mechanism for citizens to monitor their own government. Private companies are not subject to FOIA. The act's use of the phrase "supported wholly or ...

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

The private person must be found to be a quasi-agency or acting as such.

Very few private companies have had some of their records open for public inspection under FOIA Acts..but some have.

I doubt KFC / Wendy's etc would ever be subject to such record production unless a strange contract was made between a gov't agency and them.

Yeah.... that's kinda what I was trying to tell you when I said that FOIA requests did not apply to private citizens, which makes me wonder why you posted the links you did.

I'm glad it seems to have finally gotten through.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Yeah.... that's kinda what I was trying to tell you when I said that FOIA requests did not apply to private citizens, which makes me wonder why you posted the links you did.

I'm glad it seems to have finally gotten through.

Your post noted "private property owners". I looked at it from business records of businesses. Which, in limited circumstances, can be available under a FOIA request.

Now, you say "private citizens" which is even more fun of an examination. As I have won lawsuits against private citizens. How can that be? My case involved a member of the general assembly who was now out of office, i.e. a private citizen. So the question of if FOIA can be applied to a private citizen the answer is yes, in certain circumstances.

I have examined many PA records cases and it seems as if PA does a decent job regarding open records; its just that public officials don't care about the laws.

And lest not forget our common law rights to inspect records, FOIA/Sunshine laws did not eliminate this avenue of obtaining public records. An exemption under a statutory record law may not apply to a common law request. Right now I filed a common law request for records and the agency wishes to argue an exemption under our FOIA Act. However the exemption only applies to requests under a statutory record request and not a common law request. Here's some case law:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12692622583064790044&q=10-110&hl=en&as_sdt=4,7

That notes that the exemption under the Act only applies to FOIA requests.



So with any record request examination it is highly fact and circumstance dependent.

 

[Grapeshot]

--snipped--
Now, you say "private citizens" which is even more fun of an examination. As I have won lawsuits against private citizens. How can that be? My case involved a member of the general assembly who was now out of office, i.e. a private citizen. So the question of if FOIA can be applied to a private citizen the answer is yes, in certain circumstances.

One does not change his exposure by changing his status after the fact.

The former "member of the general assembly" retains his vulnerability/exposure to deeds during his tenure as a public official even after leaving office and becoming a private citizen.

It would seem that the acts of a private citizen are not subject to a FOIA.

 

[davidmcbeth]

One does not change his exposure by changing his status after the fact.

The former "member of the general assembly" retains his vulnerability/exposure to deeds during his tenure as a public official even after leaving office and becoming a private citizen.

It would seem that the acts of a private citizen are not subject to a FOIA.

I think the focus here is on records ... not "acts". But many public officials who leave public life destroy their public records. I have recently asked to inspect records of a former general assembly member who used his personal email acct almost exclusively and when he left office closed the acct, losing those public records forever.

Still thinking how to approach this issue with this particular individual. Its a crime in my state to destroy public records so I think the former GA member committed a crime.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Well then, David, by all means show us a FOIA request that affects private property owners. All you have shown so far was corporate entities, and those acting as public agencies. You found those quite easily so I am sure a FOIA demanding disclosure from a private entity shouldn't take any time at all.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Well then, David, by all means show us a FOIA request that affects private property owners. All you have shown so far was corporate entities, and those acting as public agencies. You found those quite easily so I am sure a FOIA demanding disclosure from a private entity shouldn't take any time at all.

I've already shown that businesses' records may be required to be provided access to the public.

 

[Grapeshot]

Well then, David, by all means show us a FOIA request that affects private property owners. All you have shown so far was corporate entities, and those acting as public agencies. You found those quite easily so I am sure a FOIA demanding disclosure from a private entity shouldn't take any time at all.

I've already shown that businesses' records may be required to be provided access to the public.

I see that Waffle House doesn't have an exclusive.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

I've already shown that businesses' records may be required to be provided access to the public.

Again, much as it pains me, I must point out that the named entities in both links provided were not "businesses" but were 'public entities' or 'acting as public entities' and therefore subject to Pennsylvania's Right to Know Law (65 P.S.§§ 67.101, et. seq)

I'll reserve judgement but I doubt the gentleman can provide a citation to law where the RTKL applies to anything but public agencies.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Again, much as it pains me, I must point out that the named entities in both links provided were not "businesses" but were 'public entities' or 'acting as public entities' and therefore subject to Pennsylvania's Right to Know Law (65 P.S.§§ 67.101, et. seq)

I'll reserve judgement but I doubt the gentleman can provide a citation to law where the RTKL applies to anything but public agencies.

This help?

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/Advisory_Opinions_&_Dec/AO_85.htm

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/1998FD/19981028/FIC1998-092.htm

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

This help?

In proving my point that the FOIA only applies to public agencies? Certainly, I could not prove so without your help.

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/Advisory_Opinions_&_Dec/AO_85.htm​

Taking these factors into account, as well as the other factors presented by the CSLF, the Commission nevertheless believes that the CSLF is the functional equivalent of a public agency when all relevant factors are considered, as required.

Although, the purpose of the CSLF, as set forth in Conn. Gen. Stat. §10a-201, is not an historical or traditional function of state government, at least prior to 1965, it is clear from the statutory scheme of Chapter 187a that it now performs such a function.

For the foregoing reasons, it is the Commission's opinion that the CSLF is the functional equivalent of a public agency within the meaning of Conn. Gen. Stat. §1-18a(a). Accordingly, it is the Commission's opinion that the FOI Act is applicable to the CSLF.

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/1998FD/19981028/FIC1998-092.htm[/QUOTE]​

Keep this little tidbit in mind, the respondent is saying they are a private organization and not subject to FOIA..

2. By letter dated March 26, 1998, the respondent, after conferring with its attorney, declined to provide access to the requested records based upon its belief that the respondent is “a private organization…not subject to … the Connecticut Freedom of Information Statutes”.

But, the court explains the matter of the case, citing Woodstock....

4. The present case presents a single legal issue, which is whether the respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-18a(1), G.S.

"... The test for functional equivalence to a public agency consists of the following four criteria: (1) whether the entity performs a governmental function; (2) the level of government funding; (3) the extent of government involvement or regulation; and (4) whether the entity was created by government..."

Re criteria (1)

10. While such social welfare programs are not universally supported as appropriate activities for government, it is beyond question as a matter of history and it is found that, in the period from the 1960’s to the 1990’s, social welfare programs such as those operated by the respondent have been governmental functions. (See Domestic Violence at 474.) The respondent, therefore, performed a governmental function.

Re (2)

Therefore, it is found that the level of government funding criterion of the functional equivalent test is not met.

Re (3)

"15... Because MCAA exercises “direct, pervasive… regulatory control” over the administrative operations of the respondent, the third criterion of the functional equivalent test is met.

Re (4)

"16 ... It is therefore found that the respondent was created directly by the MCAA, a public agency of government."

" 19. Based upon the law of Woodstock (the functional equivalent test), ... it is concluded that the respondent is the functional equivalent of a public agency within the meaning of §1-18a(1), G.S. "

Does that help you in understanding the difference between public and private, or would you like to provide more links to prove that public entities are subject to the FOIA and private are not?

 

[Grapeshot]

This help?

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/Advisory_Opinions_&_Dec/AO_85.htm

http://www.state.ct.us/foi/1998FD/19981028/FIC1998-092.htm

If you refer to your contention, no.

If you refer to our point that FOIA only applies to public entities, then yes.

 

[davidmcbeth]

If you refer to your contention, no.

If you refer to our point that FOIA only applies to public entities, then yes.

OK, believe what you wish.

You cite no cases at all v. numerous showing private companies' records being ordered to be produced under a FOIA request.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

OK, believe what you wish.
You cite no cases at all v. numerous showing private companies' records being ordered to be produced under a FOIA request.

Dear David
Would you be so kind as to point out any companies mentioned in any of the links you provided that was NOT operating as a public entity at the time of the FOIA request?

Thnks much

 

[FTG-05]

Looks like the OP is MIA, only one post and it was over 2 months ago. Wonder if he is not posting because he is behind bars for brandishing?

 

[Grapeshot]

Looks like the OP is MIA, only one post and it was over 2 months ago. Wonder if he is not posting because he is behind bars for brandishing?

Good for bringing us back to the thread topic.

Resident of the Gray Bar Inn or maybe just a drive by posting?

Continued discussion about FOIA should be reserved for another thread.

 

[Curmudgeon]

Looks like the OP is MIA, only one post and it was over 2 months ago. Wonder if he is not posting because he is behind bars for brandishing?

The best advice he could get, and all he needed to know, he received in the first 2 responses.
He very likely followed that advice. Wise choice.

Hopefully he'll come back after all is said and done, fill us in on the details, so that we may also learn
from his experience.

 

[solus]

Looks like the OP is MIA, only one post and it was over 2 months ago. Wonder if he is not posting because he is behind bars for brandishing?

called drive by...

ipse