Advocacy Center v. Stalder

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding the confidentiality of records would not be affected because the P&A is required to maintain the confidentiality of the records under PAIMI and “there is no reason to suspect that the confidentiality of the records will be breached.”
• allowing P & A to have access to records of prisoners incarcerated at the David Wade Correctional Center
• finding no adequate legal remedy was available to remedy facility’s denial of records
• “There is no reason to suspect that the confidentiality of the records will be breached.”
• The authority to investigate “would mean nothing and advocacy in the form of investigation would be ineffective” if federal law did not preempt state law denying access
• “the court sees no harm that would come to the defendant by forcing them to comply with provisions of the PAIMI Act, a law adopted by the national legislature

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).