Moawad v. City of Bayonne Police Department (Hudson), 111318 NJSUP, A-1808-17T1

• Judge: Before Judges Fisher and Geiger.
• Court: New Jersey Superior Court
• Date: 13 November 2018
• Parties: ZOZO MOAWAD, Appellant, v. CITY OF BAYONNE POLICE DEPARTMENT (HUDSON), Respondent.
• Docket Number: A-1808-17T1

ZOZO MOAWAD, Appellant,

v.

CITY OF BAYONNE POLICE DEPARTMENT (HUDSON), Respondent.

No. A-1808-17T1

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

November 13, 2018

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted October 23, 2018

On appeal from the New Jersey Government Records Council, GRC Complaint No. 2017-162.

Zozo Moawad, appellant pro se.

John F. Coffey, II, Law Director, attorney for respondent City of Bayonne Police Department (Susan Ferraro, Assistant City Attorney, on the brief).

Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent Government Records Council (Debra A. Allen, Deputy Attorney General, on the statement in lieu of brief).

Before Judges Fisher and Geiger.

PER CURIAM

Appellant Zozo Moawad appeals from the November 14, 2017 final decision of respondent Government Records Council (GRC), administratively dismissing the complaint because Moawad had never filed a request under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA), N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 to -13, with the City of Bayonne Police Department (BPD). We affirm.

Appellant filed an OPRA request with the Hudson County Prosecutor's Office (Prosecutor's Office) seeking police reports and criminal records pertaining to her from January 1, 2000 to present. In response, an assistant prosecutor informed appellant her OPRA request could not be fulfilled because it was overbroad and the request failed to identify the specific records sought with reasonable clarity. The assistant prosecutor requested appellant clarify the specific records sought.

After appellant clarified the records sought, the assistant prosecutor informed appellant the Prosecutor's Office did not have any responsive records. The assistant prosecutor further informed appellant that a search of the Prosecutor's Office database revealed appellant's name did not appear in any criminal matter.

Appellant then filed a complaint against the BPD with the GRC. The complaint alleged the BPD did not provide the records sought pursuant to a previous subpoena, and the same records were requested from the Prosecutor's Office in an OPRA request that was denied.

BPD's records custodian filed a Statement of Information with the GRC in response to the complaint. The custodian certified that the BPD had never received an OPRA request from appellant and, therefore, it could not have denied access to the records appellant sought.

The GRC reviewed the complaint at its November 14,...