On a case-by-case basis, the coalition initiates or supports litigation to defend the public’s right to know. These are the cases and the court documents behind them.
Please note: as a small organization with limited resources, we unfortunately cannot take on unsolicited cases or provide legal advice.
Elected officials in Buffalo worked together to fast-track pay raises for themselves. They were in such a hurry that they violated Common Council meeting rules, the City Charter, and the Open Meetings Law on multiple occasions. Despite being told they were not following the law, the Council and the Mayor did it anyway, figuring no one would spend the time and money to challenge them.
They were wrong. The coalition and two city residents, Nathan Feist and Matthew Austin, filed an Article 78 lawsuit to hold them accountable.
The court did not see it our way. On February 27, 2024, Justice Craig D. Hannah of Erie County Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the challenge was filed after the four-month statute of limitations and that the Salary Review Commission was not a “public body” covered by the Open Meetings Law. The raises stood.
Reporting by Mark Scheer of the Niagara Gazette revealed that Niagara County refused to provide copies of the annual financial disclosure forms completed by county legislators. The county had gone so far as to pass a local law in 1996 declaring the forms secret.
We advised the county that its local law violated the state Freedom of Information Law and encouraged them to change it. They refused. We sued, with the assistance of the University at Buffalo Law School, and won.
Appellate Advocates submitted a FOIL request to the NYS Department of Corrections seeking, among other things, training materials presented to the board of parole. Some were produced; others were withheld under exemptions for intra-agency materials and attorney-client privilege.
Our brief, prepared with the University at Buffalo Law School, argued that attorney-client privilege must be applied narrowly in the government context and does not cover the working law of an agency. The courts sided with the government, but two dissenting justices supported our argument.
COURT DOCUMENTS
Appellate Advocates Brief (PDF)
