Mace v. Jung
| Decision Date | 06 November 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 306,306 |
| Parties | Grace MACE, Appellant, v. Morris JUNG, Appellee. |
| Court | Alaska Supreme Court |
James K. Tallman, Anchorage, for appellant.
Daniel A. Moore and James J. Delaney, Anchorage, for appellee.
Before NESBETT, C. J., and DIMOND and AREND, JJ.
Appellant brought this action for personal injuries and property damage arising out of an automobile collision. A jury returned a verdict for appellee, and appellant has appealed.
In connection with a pre-trial deposition taken by appellee, the lower court over appellant's objections ordered the production of certain records in the custody of the State Division of Welfare pertaining to appellant. The purpose of securing such records, as stated by appellee's counsel, was to show that the custody and care of appellant's three children had been assumed by the Welfare Division by reason of appellant's neglect, and that this information would have a direct bearing on appellant's mental pain and suffering allegedly resulting from the automobile accident. In the welfare records that were produced appellee discovered a statement by a policewoman, Margaret Cox, who had interrogated appellant at a hospital shortly following the accident in connection with a police investigation and report she was obliged to make regarding appellant's whereabouts the preceding twenty-four or thirty-six hours. Although the written report was not produced in evidence, Margaret Cox was called as a witness by appellee. Her testimony had a two-fold purpose: to impeach certain testimony given by appellant, and to show that appellant's injury (a spontaneous abortion) had been caused, not by the accident, but by her own neglect in failing to follow her doctor's instructions.
The action of the court in ordering the production of the welfare records was error, because it was in violation of a statute which explicitly forbids the disclosure of such records except for purposes directly connected with the administration of certain welfare programs. 1 Circumstances which would give rise to an exception to the statutory prohibition do not exist here. The purpose of examining the records was solely to provide a defense to appellee in appellant's suit against him, and was in no way directly connected with the administration of any welfare program, such as establishing eligibility, determining amounts of assistance, or providing welfare services. 2
Appellee argues that the statute merely confers a privilege of nondisclosure of records upon the state agency, and since the agency did not claim the privilege there is no error in having the records produced in accordance with the court's order. We disagree. In unambiguous language the legislature has made disclosure of welfare records unlawful. It has left no room for the exercise of agency discretion to decide whether or not records not directly connected with the administration of welfare programs should be produced in compliance with a court order. 3
Appellee next contends that no prejudice could have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Clark
...directly connected with administration of the welfare program. See In re Cager, 251 Md. 473, 248 A.2d 384 (1968); Mace v. Jung, 386 P.2d 579 (Alaska Sup.Ct.1963). Every state, including New Jersey, participates in the Federal Government's Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program (AFD......
-
Cager, In re
...of proceeding against absent fathers, but the State's Attorney's right is limited to the use of the form for this purpose. Cf. Mace v. Jung (Alaska), 386 P.2d 579; see Terrell v. City of New York (S.Ct. King's County), reported in N.Y.L.J. (Jan. 29, 1968), p. 19, col. 3. Compare State ex re......
-
Rivera v. Los Angeles County Civil Service Com.
...Court, 42 Cal.App.3d 478, 116 Cal.Rptr. 886, relied upon by appellant but also inapplicable to the case at bench. Similarly, Mace v. Jung, Alaska, 386 P.2d 579, does not relate to administration of a welfare 2. The fair hearing procedures of Welfare and Institutions Code section 10950 are n......
-
Price ex rel. Laramie County Dept. of Public Welfare v. Pearson
...to the public policy and intention expressed in public legislation, will occur and relies principally upon the case of Mace v. Jung, Alaska, 386 P.2d 579, as precedent for her position. The Alaskan statute, while not identical to that in Wyoming, contains a similar provision, i. e., it is u......