Court cites the “principle of stare decisis” in affirming a custodian of public record’s denial of a Freedom of Information Law request
Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v Teachers' Retirement Sys. of the City of N.Y, 2013 NY Slip Op 01329, Appellate Division, First Department
The Appellate Division, Third Department recently considered another “FOIL case” involving the not-for-profit Empire Center for New York State Policy’s request seeking the names of the New York State Teachers’ Retirement Systems [NYSTRS] retirees and concluded that the NYSTRS could lawfully deny such request within the exemptions from disclosure permitted by Public Officers Law §89(7)."*
The First Department came to the same conclusion in this action, holding “[The New York City Retirement System’s] decision to withhold the names of retirees of the public retirement system pursuant to the exemption set forth in Public Officers Law § 89(7) was not affected by an error of law.”
The City Retirement System’s determination, explained the court “is in accord with [the court’s] interpretation of that exemption in Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York City Police Pension Fund (88 AD3d 520 [1st Dept 2011]), motion for leave to appeal dismissed, 18 NY3d 901 ).**
Accordingly, said the First Department, “we adhere to our prior holding under the principle of stare decisis,*** which applies with particular force to issues of statutory interpretation.”
* Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York State Teachers' Retirement Sys., 2013 NY Slip Op 01117, Appellate Division, Third Department at http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-foil-request-seeking-names-of-public.html
** The First Department also noted the decision in New York Veteran Police Assn. v New York City Police Dept. Art. I Pension Fund, 61 NY2d 659, cited by the Third Department in its ruling.
*** Latin for "to stand by things decided."
The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01117.htm