Ciesla v. New Jersey Department of Health
429 N.J. Super. 127
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2012Background
- HUMC sought a CN transfer and later a revised CN; the 2008 draft staff report concerned that CN and remained unreleased.
- Ciesla, Valley’s attorney, requested the 2009 draft report from the Department under OPRA and common law in Jan 2010.
- GRC denied access to the draft report as deliberative material; Department certified the report was pre-decisional and draft.
- GRC remanded in light of Correctional Medical Services; Calabria supplemented to support deliberative-material finding.
- This appeal clarifies GRC’s OPRA limits, and the court exercises original jurisdiction to address the common-law claims.
- Court concludes the draft report is protected by deliberative process privilege and that the CN approval in 2011 stands on its own merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| OPRA’s deliberative material exemption scope | Ciesla argues for disclosure under OPRA and common law. | GRC/Department contend exemption is unqualified and absolute. | Deliberative material exemption is unqualified under OPRA. |
| GRC jurisdiction over common-law access claims | Valley asserts common-law right to draft report access. | GRC lacks authority to resolve common-law claims; jurisdiction lies in courts. | GRC lacks jurisdiction over common-law claims; exercise original jurisdiction to decide. |
| Whether the 2009 draft report could influence CN policy | Draft contained crucial analysis for HUMC’s CN and thus public interest supports disclosure. | Draft was pre-decisional and not final; its disclosure would chill deliberations. | Draft is deliberative and would chill agency deliberations; disclosure not required. |
| Impact of 2011 CN final decision on relevance of 2009 draft | 2009 draft could be essential to Valley’s CN appeal. | 2011 CN stands on its own merits; draft never acted upon. | Draft remains non-competent proof; not needed for 2011 CN decision. |
Key Cases Cited
- Education Law Center v. N.J. Department of Education, 198 N.J. 274 (N.J. 2009) (deliberative process privilege; internal memos may be exempt)
- In re Liquidation of Integrity Insurance Co., 165 N.J. 75 (N.J. 2000) (deliberative materials privilege roots)
- Correctional Medical Services, Inc. v. State, 426 N.J. Super. 106 (App.Div. 2012) (distinguishes deliberative material in contractual contexts)
- State v. Ballard, 331 N.J. Super. 529 (App. Div. 2000) (pre-decisional drafts protected; deliberative privilege recognized)
- Paff v. New Jersey Department of Labor, Board of Review, 379 N.J. Super. 346 (App. Div. 2005) (GRC jurisdiction limited to OPRA context)