Teacher's Personnel File Disclosed Under The Freedom of Information Act

If you have a question or concern about special education law, school administration, federal standards, or the overall rights of a student, please feel free to call the expert education law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at (203) 221-3100 .

In the case of Jerr v. Freedom of Information Commission, a teacher sought review of a judgment which ordered the disclosure of several documents from the teacher's personnel file. For clarity, the Freedom of Information Act allows for the full or partial disclosure of records otherwise held as confidential by governments and administrations. However, the act has some exceptions for the disclosure of personnel, medical or similar files which would constitute an invasion of personal privacy.

The teacher filed a complaint was filed with the FOIC alleging that the board of education had violated the Freedom of Information Act by denying access to previously requested records. The teacher objected to the disclose, and argued that records of teacher performance or evaluation maintained by boards of education are not discoverable pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. In exempting these records of teacher performance and evaluation, the lawmakers chose neither to provide criteria for determining what documents constitute such records nor to define the term "records." Generally, when lawmakers use a broad term, in an administrative context, without attempting to define that term, it shows a lawmaker’s intent for the agency to define the limits and defnitions of that term on a case-by-case basis. The practical construction placed on the law by the agency is highly persuasive.  After a hearing, the FOIC determined that certain documents were not exempt from disclosure and thus would be disclosed. The court's review of the entire administrative record revealed that the documents in issue appeared to relate to specific alleged criticism of the teacher's conduct by school administrators, including the methods used to take disciplinary action against a student and requesting that parents contact the board of education in an attempt to overrule a decision of the superintendent of schools. The FOIC's conclusion that the teacher had not met this burden was, therefore, not unreasonable.

Given the record that it was presented, the FOIC had the task of determining whether the letters in the case were records of teacher performance and evaluation within the broad meaning of that term which the FOIC did. The teacher had not sufficiently refuted that definition, and his appeal was dismissed. “The burden rests upon [the teacher] to prove the applicability of the [law’s exemption for teachers]” said the court. “As noted above, generalized allegations or arguments of counsel are insufficient to meet this burden. The FOIC's conclusion that [the teacher] has not met this burden is, therefore, not unreasonable.”

If you have a child with a disability and have questions about special education law, please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.

Source: Jerr v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 2001 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2238, 2001 WL 1002751 (Conn. Super. Ct. Aug. 6, 2001)