Skip to main content
· 3/12/2021

Meriden v. Freedom of Information Commission

Citations

  • 338 Conn. 310

Syllabus

Pursuant to a provision of the Freedom of Information Act (§ 1-200 (2)), the term ''meeting'' means ''any hearing or other proceeding of a public agency, any convening or assembly of a quorum of a multimember public agency, and any communication by or to a quorum of a multimember public agency . . . to discuss or act upon a matter over which the public agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.'' The defendant Freedom of Information Commission appealed to this court from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which reversed the trial court's judgment dismissing the administrative appeal of the plaintiffs, the city of Meriden and its city council. Four leaders of the twelve member city council had gathered at city hall with the mayor and the retiring city manager to discuss the upcoming search for a new city manager. The four member leadership group agreed to submit a resolu- tion to create a city manager search committee to the full city council for its consideration at an upcoming meeting and thereafter drafted a proposed resolution listing the names of people to be considered for appointment to the committee and detailing the committee's duties. Thereafter, a complaint was filed with the commission, alleging that the leadership group gathering was an unnoticed and private meeting, in violation of the open meetings provision of the Freedom of Information Act (§ 1-225 (a)). The commission concluded that the gathering was a ''proceeding'' within the meaning of § 1-200 (2), such a proceeding constituted a ''meeting'' within the meaning of that subdivision, and the plaintiffs violated § 1-225 (a) by failing to properly notice the gathering and to conduct it in public view. Subsequently, the plaintiffs appealed from the commission's decision to the trial court. In dismissing the plaintiffs' appeal, the trial court concluded that the commissioner's factual findings and conclusions were supported by substantial evidence and that the gathering constitut

Judges: Robinson; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Kahn; Ecker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.