DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Records and Meetings Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Records and Meetings Manual STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS MANUAL “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance. And a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both.” James Madison (1822) ELLEN F. ROSENBLUM Attorney General June 2019 OREGON ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS MANUAL 2019 STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS MANUAL ELLEN F. ROSENBLUM Attorney General June 2019 © 2019 State of Oregon acting by and through its Department of Justice All rights reserved Additional copies may be purchased from: Publications Section Department of Justice 1162 Court Street N.E. Salem, Oregon 97301-4096 For current price, please call: (503) 378-2992 TTY: (800) 735-2900 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. x PREFACE ....................................................................................................... xiii RENUMBERING OF PUBLIC RECORDS LAW ...................................... xiv I. PUBLIC RECORDS ................................................................................... 1 A. WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO INSPECT PUBLIC RECORDS? ................................... 1 B. WHO IS SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW? ......................................... 2 1. Public Bodies ............................................................................................ 2 2. Private Bodies ........................................................................................... 3 C. WHAT RECORDS ARE COVERED BY THE LAW? ............................................. 6 1. Writing ...................................................................................................... 6 2. Prepared, Owned, Used, or Retained ........................................................ 8 D. HOW CAN A PERSON INSPECT OR OBTAIN PUBLIC RECORDS? ....................... 9 1. Making a Request ...................................................................................... 9 2. Records Custodian .................................................................................. 11 3. Acknowledging a Request ....................................................................... 11 4. Completing the Response to a Request ................................................... 12 a. The 15 Business-Day Deadline .................................................... 13 b. Exceptions to the Deadlines ......................................................... 15 c. Failing to Complete a Timely Response ....................................... 16 5. Inspecting Records versus Obtaining Copies .......................................... 16 a. Inspecting Records ....................................................................... 17 b. Copying Records .......................................................................... 18 6. Protective Rules ...................................................................................... 19 7. Fees ......................................................................................................... 20 a. Fee Schedules ............................................................................... 21 b. Waiving or Reducing Fees ........................................................... 22 (1) Public Interest Test ................................................................... 23 (2) Decision on Fee Waiver or Reduction...................................... 24 8. Consulting with Legal Counsel ............................................................... 26 9. Retaining and Destroying Public Records ............................................... 26 10. Oregon Transparency Website ............................................................ 28 E. HOW DOES A PUBLIC BODY DETERMINE IF RECORDS ARE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE? .............................................................................................. 29 1. The Nature of the Exemptions ................................................................ 29 2. Conditional and Unconditional Exemptions from Disclosure. ................ 31 3. The Public Interest in Disclosure ............................................................ 32 4. Separating Exempt and Nonexempt Material.......................................... 34 5. Waiving an Exemption ............................................................................ 35 6. Records More than 25 Years Old ............................................................ 36 7. The Federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)................................... 37 8. Finding Exemptions ................................................................................ 37 iii 9. Sunshine Committee ............................................................................... 38 F. WHERE AND HOW DOES A PERSON PROCEED IF ACCESS IS REFUSED?........ 38 1. Petitions to the Attorney General ............................................................ 40 a. Role of the Attorney General........................................................ 40 b. General Procedures ....................................................................... 41 c. Health Professional Regulatory Boards and Health Licensing Office ............................................................................................ 43 2. Petitions to the District Attorney ............................................................. 45 3. Elected Officials ...................................................................................... 46 4. Court Proceedings ................................................................................... 47 5. Public Records Advocate ........................................................................ 50 G. WHAT PUBLIC RECORDS ARE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE? ....................... 51 a. The Conditional Exemptions of ORS 192.345 ............................. 51 (1) Public Records Pertaining to Litigation ..................................... 51 (2) Trade Secrets ............................................................................. 54 (3) Criminal Investigations .............................................................. 58 (4) Tests and Examinations ............................................................. 60 (5) Business Records Required to be Submitted ............................. 60 (6) Real Estate Appraisals ............................................................... 61 (7) Employee Representation Cards ................................................ 62 (8) Civil Rights Investigations ........................................................ 62 (9) Unfair Labor Practice Investigations ......................................... 63 (10) Debt Consolidator Investigations ........................................... 63 (11) Archaeological Site Information ............................................ 63 (12) Personnel Discipline Actions ................................................. 64 (13) Information about Threatened or Endangered Species ........... 66 (14) Faculty Research .................................................................... 67 (15) Computer Programs for the Use of Public Bodies ................. 67 (16) Agricultural Producer Indebtedness Mediation Data ............. 68 (17) Unsafe Workplace Investigation Materials ............................ 68 (18) Public Safety Plans ................................................................. 69 (19) Telecommunications Utility Audits ....................................... 69 (20) Voter’s Home Address ........................................................... 70 (21) Housing Authority and Urban Renewal Agency Records ...... 71 (22) Interference with Property or Services ................................... 72 (23) Security Measures .................................................................. 73 (24) OHSU and Public University Donation Records ................... 74 (25) Public University Donation Records ...................................... 74 (26) Commodity Commission Filers.............................................. 75 (27) Financial Transfer Records .................................................... 75 (28) Social Security Numbers in Divorce Cases ............................ 75 (29) University Student E-mail Addresses ..................................... 76 iv (30) OHSU Medical Researcher Records ...................................... 76 (31) Personal Information of Public Safety Officers Appearing in Certain Records............................................................................... 77 (32) Personal Information of Certain Government Attorneys........ 78 (33) Land Management Plans ........................................................ 79 (34) SAIF Corporation Business Records ...................................... 80 (35) Public Safety Officer Investigations ....................................... 80 (36) Medical Examiner Records .................................................... 81 (37) Ongoing Audits of Public Bodies ........................................... 82 (38) Electronic Fare Information ................................................... 83 (39) Personal Information of Civil Code Enforcement Officers in Certain Records............................................................................... 84 (40) Body Camera Footage ...........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identity Theft Literature Review
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Identity Theft Literature Review Author(s): Graeme R. Newman, Megan M. McNally Document No.: 210459 Date Received: July 2005 Award Number: 2005-TO-008 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. IDENTITY THEFT LITERATURE REVIEW Prepared for presentation and discussion at the National Institute of Justice Focus Group Meeting to develop a research agenda to identify the most effective avenues of research that will impact on prevention, harm reduction and enforcement January 27-28, 2005 Graeme R. Newman School of Criminal Justice, University at Albany Megan M. McNally School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University, Newark This project was supported by Contract #2005-TO-008 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy and Publicity: the Two Facets of Personality Rights
    Privacy and publicity Privacy and publicity: the two facets of personality rights hyperbole. In this context, personality In this age of endorsements and rights encompass the “right of privacy”, tabloid gossip, famous people which prohibits undue interference in need to protect their rights and a person’s private life. In addition to coverage in the media, reputations. With a growing number images of celebrities adorn anything from of reported personality rights cases, t-shirts, watches and bags to coffee mugs. India must move to develop its This is because once a person becomes legal framework governing the famous, the goods and services that he or commercial exploitation of celebrity she chooses to endorse are perceived to reflect his or her own personal values. By Bisman Kaur and Gunjan Chauhan, A loyal fan base is a captive market for Remfry & Sagar such goods, thereby allowing celebrities to cash in on their efforts in building up Introduction a popular persona. Intellectual property in India is no longer Unfortunately, a large fan base is a niche field of law. Stories detailing also seen by unscrupulous people as an trademark infringement and discussing opportunity to bring out products or the grant of geographical indications services that imply endorsement by an routinely make their way into the daily individual, when in fact there is no such news headlines. From conventional association. In such cases the individual’s categories of protection such as patents, “right of publicity” is called into play. trademarks, designs and copyright, IP laws The right of publicity extends to every have been developed, often by judicial individual, not just those who are famous, innovation, to encompass new roles and but as a practical matter its application areas of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Income Tax Returns--Confidentiality Vs
    Federal Income Tax Returns--Confidentiality vs. Public Disclosure* by Boris I. Bittker* * I. INTRODUCTION This article will examine the relationship between the individual's interest in privacy, reflected in such recent statutes as the Privacy Act of 1974, I and the public's right to know, which underlies legislation like the Freedom of Information Act. 2 The subject is of intrinsic impor­ tance, but it is particularly appropriate for an article in this lecture se­ ries, since privacy3 and disclosure4 were values of special interest to Justice Douglas. Neither the individual's right to privacy5 nor the pub­ lic's right to know6 is explicitly protected by the Constitution, but both do have constitutional overtones, and both are protected by various statutory provisions. Using federal income tax returns as the centerpiece of the discus­ sion, I propose to show how privacy and disclosure can come into con­ flict-a possibility that has been insufficiently recognized by the courts and the commentators. The leading treatise on political and civil rights,7 for example, treats the two subjects in separate chapters with virtually no acknowledgement that they are related, let alone that they • Copyright 1981 by Boris I. Bittker. •• Sterling Professor of Law. Yale University. This article is the modified text of a speech delivered at the Fifth Annual William O. Douglas Lecture Series. October 30. 1980. I. Pub. L. No. 93-579, § 3, 88 Stat. 1897 (amended 1975 & 1977) codified at 5 U.S.C § 552a (1976». 2. Pub. L. No. 89-554, 80 Stat. 383 (1966) (amended 1967, 1974, 1976 & 1978) (codified at 5 U.S.C § 552 (1976».
    [Show full text]
  • 100 Days, a Lifetime & 100 Years of Service
    Board Secreatry Carra Sahler stands between Judges Edward Leavy and Garr King Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Karin Immergut (third from right) joins past Oregon Attorneys General (left to right) Hardy Myers (1996-2009), David Frohnmayer (1981-91), Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum (2012- ), former Attor- neys General, Judge James Redden (1977-80), and Governor Ted Kulongoski annUal Dinner 2012: 100 Days, a Lifetime & 100 Years of Service By Anne Marie King Susan Glen, Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Marilyn Litzenberger, and On October 25, 2012, the Historical Society Trudy Allen and its guests met for the Annual Dinner. President Steve Joncus welcomed attendees, and presented the Society’s Lifetime Service Award to Portland philanthropist and early USDCHS board member, Arlene Schnitzer. The award was accompanied by a video docu- mentary of her life. In accepting her award, She spoke of her fondness for Portland and the importance of organizations such as the 2012 Lifetime Service award Historical Society. recipient Arlene Schnitzer with The evening was also a celebration of Judge Owen Panner. Past President Kari Furnanz with col- Oregon’s attorneys general. Nearly all living leagues Abby Miller and Brian Bent. former attorneys general were present including the Hon. James A. Redden, David B. Frohnmayer, Governor Ted Kulongoski, Hardy Myers, and Ellen Rosenblum, Oregon’s first woman attorney general. Notably, as guests were introduced, Judge Redden had the distinction of hearing his name called twice: once as a federal judge, and once as a former attorney general in attendance. Judge Anna Brown then introduced the evening’s speaker, Oregon’s incum- bent Attorney General, Ellen Rosenblum.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Information: a Comparative Legal Survey
    JeXo C[dZ[b ^h i]Z AVl J^[_cfehjWdY[e\j^[h_]^jje Egd\gVbbZ9^gZXidgl^i]6GI>8A:&.!<adWVa 8VbeV^\c [dg ;gZZ :megZhh^dc! V aZVY^c\ _d\ehcWj_edehj^[h_]^jjeadem_iWd ^ciZgcVi^dcVa ]jbVc g^\]ih C<D WVhZY ^c _dYh[Wi_d]boYedijWdjh[\hW_d_dj^[ AdcYdc! V edh^i^dc ]Z ]Vh ]ZaY [dg hdbZ iZc nZVgh# >c i]Vi XVeVX^in! ]Z ]Vh ldg`ZY cekj^ie\Z[l[befc[djfhWYj_j_ed[hi" ZmiZch^kZan dc [gZZYdb d[ ZmegZhh^dc VcY g^\]i id ^c[dgbVi^dc ^hhjZh ^c 6h^V! 6[g^XV! Y_l_bieY_[jo"WYWZ[c_Yi"j^[c[Z_WWdZ :jgdeZ! i]Z B^YYaZ :Vhi VcY AVi^c 6bZg^XV! ]el[hdc[dji$M^Wj_ij^_ih_]^j"_i_j gjcc^c\ igV^c^c\ hZb^cVgh! Xg^i^fj^c\ aVlh! iV`^c\XVhZhidWdi]cVi^dcVaVcY^ciZgcVi^dcVa h[WbboWh_]^jWdZ^em^Wl[]el[hdc[dji WdY^Zh! VYk^h^c\ C<Dh VcY \dkZgcbZcih! VcY ZkZc ldg`^c\ l^i] d[ÒX^Vah id egZeVgZ iek]^jje]_l[[\\[Yjje_j5J^[i[Wh[ YgV[ig^\]iid^c[dgbVi^dcaVlh#>cVYY^i^dcid iec[e\j^[gk[ij_edij^_iXeeai[[ai ]^h ldg` l^i] 6GI>8A:&.! ]Z ]Vh egdk^YZY ZmeZgi^hZ dc i]ZhZ ^hhjZh id V l^YZ gVc\Z jeWZZh[ii"fhel_Z_d]WdWYY[ii_Xb[ d[ VXidgh ^cXajY^c\ i]Z LdgaY 7Vc`! kVg^djh JCVcYdi]Zg^ciZg\dkZgcbZciVaWdY^Zh!VcY WYYekdje\j^[bWmWdZfhWYj_Y[h[]WhZ_d] cjbZgdjh C<Dh# Eg^dg id _d^c^c\ 6GI>8A: \h[[Zece\_d\ehcWj_ed"WdZWdWdWboi_i &.!IdWnBZcYZaldg`ZY^c]jbVcg^\]ihVcY ^ciZgcVi^dcVa YZkZadebZci! ^cXajY^c\ Vh V e\m^Wj_imeha_d]WdZm^o$ hZc^dg ]jbVc g^\]ih XdchjaiVci l^i] Dm[Vb 8VcVYVVcYVhV]jbVcg^\]iheda^XnVcVanhi 68dbeVgVi^kZAZ\VaHjgkZn Vi i]Z 8VcVY^Vc >ciZgcVi^dcVa 9ZkZadebZci ;gZZYdbd[>c[dgbVi^dc/ 6\ZcXn8>96# ÆJ^[\h[[Ôeme\_d\ehcWj_edWdZ_Z[Wi IdWn BZcYZa ]Vh ejWa^h]ZY l^YZan! b_[iWjj^[^[Whje\j^[l[hodej_ede\ 6 8dbeVgVi^kZ AZ\Va HjgkZn Xdcig^Wji^c\ id cjbZgdjh 6GI>8A: &.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Dot Etc. Map Alaska Alabama Arizona Arkansas California
    greendot, etc. training staff and board map green dot gear contact us Green Dot etc. map Alaska | Alabama | Arizona | Arkansas | California | Colorado | Connecticut | DC | Delaw are | Florida | Georgia | Haw aii | Idaho | Illinois| Indiana | Iow a | Kentucky | Louisiana | Maine | Maryland | Massachusetts | Michigan | Minnesota | Mississippi | Missouri | Nebraska | Nevada | New Jersey | New York | North Carolina | Ohio | Oklahoma | Oregon | Pennsylvania | Rhode Island | South Carolina | South Dakota | Tennessee| Texas | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | West Virginia | Wisconsin| Guam | Canada | Italy | Japan | Portugal BY STATE: Alaska Akhiok Village, Akhiok, AK Council of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, Juneau, AK Discovery Cove, Kodiak, AK Governor's Office, Juneau, AK Kodiak Area Native Association, Kodiak, AK Kodiak Women's Resource Crisis Center, Kodiak, AK Larsen Bay Village , Larsen Bay, AK Old Harbor Village, Old Harbor, AK Ouzinkie Village, Ouzinkie, AK Port Lions Village, Port Lions, AK Providence Kodiak Island Medical Center, Kodiak, AK SAFE and Fear Free Environment, Dillingham, AK Southcentral Foundation Family Wellness Warriors, Anchorage, AK Standing Together Against Rape, Anchorage, AK Sun'aq, Kodiak, AK Tundra Women's Coalition, Bethel, AK University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK To schedule an on-site training please contact information. Alabama Auburn University, Auburn, AL Birmingham Southern College, Birmingham, AL Miles College, Fairfield, AL Samford University, Birmingham, AL The University of Alabama
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Jon A
    Curriculum Vitae Jon A. Souder 62783 Shinglehouse Slough Rd. Coos Bay, OR 97420 (541) 888-5922 E-Mail: [email protected] EDUCATION Ph.D. University of California - Berkeley. Wildland Resources Science with major in natural resources policy, economics and management. Dissertation title: "Economic Strategies for the Management of School and Institutional Trust Lands: A Comparative Study of Ten Western States." 1990. M.S. Wildland Resource Science. University of California - Berkeley. 1987. Emphasis in forest management and economics. B.S. Biology. Marlboro College, Marlboro, Vermont. 1973. Emphasis in limnology and ecology. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 10/2015 – Present Assistant Professor and Specialist, Forest Watershed Extension. Department of Forest Engineering, Resources, and Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. (http://ferm.forestry.oregonstate.edu/). 3/2016 – 12/2018 Director. Watershed Research Cooperative. College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. (www.watershedsresearch.org). 7/2000 – 9/2015 Executive Director. Coos Watershed Association, Charleston, OR. (www.cooswatershed.org). 6/1998 – 6/2000 Associate Professor of Forest Policy and Economics. School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 6/1998 to 5/1999 Expert Witness, Lewis Co. v. Belcher (Washington DNR HCP). Washington Attorney General, Olympia, WA. 11/1993 to 6/1998 Assistant Professor of Forest Policy and Economics. School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 9/1992 to 11/1993 Ciriacy-Wantrup Post-Doctoral Fellow in Natural Resource Economics. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley. 12/1990 to 9/1992 Director, State Lands Project. Department of Forestry and Resource Management, University of California, Berkeley. 3/1988 to 11/1990 Graduate Research Assistant: State and Sovereign Lands Management.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Media Outlets
    Oregon Media Outlets Newswire’s Media Database​​ provides targeted media outreach opportunities to key trade journals, publications, and outlets. The following records are related to traditional media from radio, print and television based on the information provided by the media. Note: The listings may be subject to change based on the latest data. ________________________________________________________________________________ Radio Stations 28. KKNU-FM [New Country 93] 1. All Things Considered 29. KLAD-FM [92.5 KLAD] 2. Cooking Outdoors w/ Mr. BBQ 30. KLCC-FM 3. Green Tips 31. KLDZ-FM [Kool 103.5] 4. GROUND ZERO WITH CLYDE LEWIS 32. KLOO-AM [Newsradio 1340 (KLOO)] 5. Honky Tonk Hour 33. KLOO-FM [106.3 KLOO] 6. Jefferson Public Radio 34. KMED-AM [NewsTalk 1440] 7. K218AE-FM 35. KMGE-FM [Mix 94.5] 8. K265CP-FM 36. KMGX-FM [Mix 100.7] 9. K283BH-FM 37. KMHD-FM 10. KACI-AM [Newsradio 1300] 38. KMUN-FM 11. KACI-FM [K-C 93.5] 39. KMUZ-FM 12. KBCC-LP 40. KNRK-FM [94/7 Alternative Portland] 13. KBCH-AM 41. KNRQ-FM [Alternative 103.7 NRQ] 14. KBFF-FM [Live 95-5] 42. KODL-AM [Radio Freshing] 15. KBND-AM [Newstalk 1110] 43. KODZ-FM [KOOL 99.1] 16. KBOO-FM [K-Boo] 44. KPFA-FM [Pacifica Radio] 17. KCFM-AM 45. KPNW-AM [Newsradio 1120] 18. KCMX-FM [Lite 102] 46. KPOV-FM 19. KCUW-LP 47. KPSU-AM 20. KDUK-FM [104.7 KDUK] 48. KPVN-LP 21. KDYM-AM [Juan] 49. KRCO-AM 22. KEC42-FM 50. KRKT-FM [99.9 KRKT] 23.
    [Show full text]
  • ADVOCATE.Fall 2015.FINAL MASTER
    Illustrious Firsts I Monumental Legacies I Scholarships Pay It Forward I Then and Now: Starting Law School TheADVOCATE LEWIS & CLARK LAW SCHOOL I PORTLAND, OREGON I FALL 2015 CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION! Alumni Board of Directors Board of Visitors 2015-16 Table of Contents 2015-16 John E. Bates Features Matthew P. Bergman ’89 Tonya Alexander ’01 Illustrious Firsts: A Timeline . 10 Sidney K. Billingslea ’84 Katheryn Bradley ’86 Monumental Legacies . 16 Bowen Blair ’80 Coby Dolan ’99 Paying It Forward With Scholarships . 20 Monte Bricker Dan Eller ’04, President Then and Now: Starting Law School . 21 Jerry F. Carleton ’07 Courtney Flora ’98 Windows Into the Past . 24 Adina Flynn ’96, Past President Ying Chen ’95 The Right Dean for the Times . 28 David Hittle ’74 Jonathan B. Cole ’76 Three Eminent Ties to Apron Strings . 32 Thomas C. Jensen ’83 Bruce I. Crocker ’76 Centennial Celebration Weekend . 36 Jeannie Lee ’08 Victoria E. Cumings ’04 Honor Roll of Donors . 58 Molly Marcum ’82 Jeffrey B. Curtis ’86 Hon. Keith Meisenheimer ’76 Stephen A. Doherty ’84 Departments Sarah Melton ’08 Barnes H. Ellis Events in the News . 2 Ajit Phadke ’98, Vice President David A. Ernst ’85 Commencement. 6 Justin Sawyer ’01 M. Carr Ferguson Faculty and Staff News . 38 Kenneth “KC” Schefski ’99 Paul T. Fortino Class Notes . 46 Heather Self ’01 Hon. Julie E. Frantz ’75 In Memoriam . 56 Jason Wilson-Aguilar ’96 Hon. Susan P. Graber D. Lawrence Wobbrock ’77 Gary I. Grenley ’75 Volume 38, Number 1, Fall 2015 Edwin A. Harnden The Advocate Recent Graduate Christine Helmer ’74 Lewis &Clark Law School Council Steven J.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Title Records in the New York State Archives New York State Archives Information Leaflet #11 [DRAFT] ______
    Land Title Records in the New York State Archives New York State Archives Information Leaflet #11 [DRAFT] __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Introduction NEW YORK STATE ARCHIVES Cultural Education Center Room 11A42 The New York State Archives holds numerous records Albany, NY 12230 documenting title to real property in New York. The records range in date from the early seventeenth century to Phone 518-474-8955 the near present. Practically all of the records dating after FAX 518-408-1940 the early nineteenth century concern real property E-mail [email protected] acquired or disposed by the state. However, many of the Website www.archives.nysed.gov earlier records document conveyances of real property ______________________________________________ between private persons. The Archives holds records of grants by the colony and state for lands above and under Contents: water; deeds issued by various state officers; some private deeds and mortgages; deeds to the state for public A. Indian Deeds and Treaties [p. 2] buildings and facilities; deeds and cessions to the United B. Dutch Land Grants and Deeds [p. 2] States; land appropriations for canals and other public purposes; and permits, easements, etc., to and from the C. New York Patents for Uplands state. The Archives also holds numerous records relating and Lands Under Water [p. 3] to the survey and sale of lands of the colony and state. D. Applications for Patents for Uplands and Lands Under Water [p. 6] This publication contains brief descriptions of land title records and related records in the Archives. Each record E. Deeds by Commissioners of Forfeitures [p. 9] series is identified by series number (five-character F.
    [Show full text]
  • Ppr 75M-Final
    issue #75 september www. Police crack down on portlandcopwatch. org 2018 antifascist protests—p. 9 Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Issue! THE PORTLAND POLICE Copwatch Research Leads BUREAU AND “UNION” VS. State DOJ to Promise HOUSELESS PEOPLE Improved Officer Shooting Data ecent statistics reveal that the Portland Oregon Incidents Reach 25 in Seven Police Bureau (PPB) is arresting and using Months— Normal Number for a Year Rforce against houseless persons in numbers s reported in PPR #74, in January vastly more than they are represented in CELEBRATE OUR 25TH Portland Copwatch (PCW) sent a list Portland’s population. Further, the Portland Aof 192 incidents involving Oregon Law ANNIVERSARY!!! Police Association Enforcement from 2010-2017 to the (PPA) President has ear readers: Five years ago when the Attorney General to prompt the legally referred to Portland as Portland Copwatch (PCW) newsletter Dreached its 20th anniversary, we observed: required publication of officer involved a “cesspool” and he “Since late 1993, we’ve been publishing the deaths, as mandated in 2007. In early May, isn’t backing down. People’s Police Report three times a year a reporter from KBOO let PCW know the A July 1 Oregonian to bring you news and analysis about Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) had article indicated Portland’s Police, laws designed to be quietly been posting information about houseless people enforced selectively, the oversight system, those deaths to the state’s website for over made up 52% of and civil rights and liberties in general.” We 16 months. PCW the arrests in 2017 posted cover images of the 59 previous examined the although they are editions; with our 25th anniversary issue, Oregonian, July 11 we now have covers for PPRs #60-74 on line: published data and about 3% of the <portlandcopwatch.org/PPRcovers.html>.
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Privacy and Rights of the Personality
    AGTA Instituti Upsaliensis Iurisprudentiae Gomparativae VIII RIGHT OF PRIVACY AND RIGHTS OF THE PERSONALITY A COMPARATIVE SURVEY Working paper prepared for the Nordic Conferen.ee on privacy organized by the International Commission of Jurists, Stockholm M ay 1967 BY STIG STRÜMHOLM STOCKHOLM P. A. NORSTEDT & SÜNERS FÜRLAG ACTA Institut! Upsaliensis Iurisprudentiae Oomparativae AGTA Instituti Upsaliensis Iurisprudentiae Comjmrativae Edidit ÂKE MALMSTROM VIII RIGHT OF PRIVACY AND RIGHTS OF THE PERSONALITY A COMPARATIVE SURVEY (Working Paper prepared for the Nordic Conférence on Privacy organized by the International Commission of Jurists, Stockholm May 1967) By STIG STRÜMHOLM S T O C K H O L M P. A. N O RSTEDT & S ONE R S FÜRLAG © P. A. Norstedt & Sôners fôrlag 1967 Boktryckeri AB Thule, Stockholm 1967 PREFACE One of the author’s most eminent teachers in private law in the Uppsala Faculty of Law once claimed that an action in tort ought to lie against those légal writers who take up a subject to treat it broadly enough to deter others from writing about it but not deeply enough to give any final answers to the questions discussed. Were the law so severe, the present author would undoubtedly have to face a lawsuit for venturing to publish this short study on a topic which demands lengthy and careful considération on almost every point and which has already given rise to an extensive body of case law and of légal writing. This préfacé can be considered as the au­ thor’s plaidoyer in that action, fortunately imaginary. The present study was prepared at the request, and with the most active personal and material support, of the International Commis­ sion of Jurists as a working paper for the Nordic Conférence of Jurists, organized by the Commission in Stockholm in May, 1967.
    [Show full text]