11-30-07 A-0578-06T3
We remanded for a more detailed articulation of reasons
where Law Division denied plaintiff's request, under the common
law "right to know" doctrine, to release approximately 2000
pages of documents. We held that the Law Division judge should
have made specific factual findings, focusing either on
individual documents or groups of documents. Without such
findings, we are unable to determine if the Law Division judge
abused his discretion. If necessary, those factual findings
should be made in a separate, sealed decision, pending appellate
review. Plaintiff has a personal interest in the release of
these public records, as the documents relate to an
investigation focused on an alleged attempt to impact
plaintiff's appointment to a public position.
