Dillon v Chicago Lawsuit

October 1, 2019

Sam Stecklow

Via email at requests@muckrock.com

Dear Mr. Stecklow,

On behalf of the City of Chicago Department of Law, I am responding to your Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request which was dated September 24, 2019 and received in our offices on the same day. At this time, the Law Department is seeking an extension of five additional working days to respond to the request for one or more of the following reasons identified in 5 ILCS 140/3(e) of FOIA:
( ) the requested records are stored in whole or in part at other locations than the office having charge of the requested records;
( ) the request requires the collection of a substantial number of specified records;
( ) the request is couched in categorical terms and requires an extensive search for the records responsive to it;
( ) the requested records have not been located in the course of routine search and additional efforts are being made to locate them;
( ) the requested records require examination and evaluation by personnel having the necessary competence and discretion to determine if they are exempt from disclosure under Section 7 of the FOIA or should be revealed only with appropriate deletions;
( ) the request for records cannot be complied with by the public body within the time limits prescribed by 5 ILCS 140/3(d) without unduly burdening or interfering with the operations of the public body;

(xx) there is need for consultation, which shall be conducted with all practicable speed, with another public body or among two or more components of a public body having a substantial interest in the determination or in the subject matter of the request.

Sincerely,

Tom Skelton

FOIA Officer - Department of Law

October 8, 2019

Sam Stecklow

Via email at requests@muckrock.com

Dear Mr. Stecklow,

On behalf of the City of Chicago Department of Law, I am responding to your Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request which was dated September 24, 2019 and received in our office on the same day. The Law Department took a 5-day extension to your request on October 1, 2019. You requested:

Requesting all CPD records, depositions, and written discovery taken as part of the federal lawsuit Dillon, et al v. Chicago, et al (08-cv-3640).

Your request is unduly burdensome under Section 3(g) of FOIA. Section 3(g) of FOIA provides that "requests for all records falling within a category shall be complied with unless compliance with the request would be unduly burdensome for the complying public body and there is no way to narrow the request and the burden on the public body outweighs the public interest in the information."

The Law Department ordered the boxes for the Dillon case. There are voluminous records from CPD that would need to be reviewed and redacted before producing. There are likely as many as two whole bankers boxes of CPD records that would need to be reviewed and redacted before producing. There are also nine depositions from the case along with a voluminous number of subpoenas and other written discovery from the case. Given the number of records that would need to be reviewed and redacted before producing the records under FOIA, it is fair to estimate that it would take at least 40 hours to respond to this request. While there may be some public interest in the information, the burden the request places on the Law Department outweighs the public interest. The request is unduly burdensome under Section 3(g) of FOIA.

It is necessary that your FOIA request be narrowed and clarified. If you would like assistance in narrowing your request, please contact me, and I will assist you. Otherwise, for the reasons provided above, the Law Department is unable to respond to your FOIA request as currently drafted.

If you agree to narrow your request, you must submit a revised written request to my attention. The Law Department will take no further action or send you any further correspondence unless and until your current request is narrowed in writing. If we do not receive your narrowed request within fourteen calendar days of the date of this letter, your current request will be denied.

In the event that we do not receive a narrowed request and your current FOIA request is therefore denied, you have the right to have a denial reviewed by the Public Access Counselor (PAC) at the Office of the Illinois Attorney General, 500 S. 2nd Street, Springfield, Illinois 62706, (877) 299-3642. You also have the right to seek judicial review of your denial by filing a lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court.

Sincerely,

Tom Skelton

FOIA Officer - Department of Law

Yes, I can. Sorry, it's been pretty busy around here. I will do this Monday.

Hi Sam,

Here are the deposition transcripts I found for the Dillon case:

Michael Okenieff, M.D.
Sgt. Kevin D. Glover
Sgt. Jeffrey Coleman
Officer Michael Grubbs
Stanley Gas

Sincerely,
Tom

November 8, 2019

Sam Stecklow

Via email at requests@muckrock.com

Dear Mr. Stecklow,

On behalf of the City of Chicago Department of Law, I am responding to your Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request which was dated November 1, 2019 and received in our offices on the same day. At this time, the Law Department is seeking an extension of five additional working days to respond to the request for one or more of the following reasons identified in 5 ILCS 140/3(e) of FOIA:
( ) the requested records are stored in whole or in part at other locations than the office having charge of the requested records;
( ) the request requires the collection of a substantial number of specified records;
( ) the request is couched in categorical terms and requires an extensive search for the records responsive to it;
( ) the requested records have not been located in the course of routine search and additional efforts are being made to locate them;
( ) the requested records require examination and evaluation by personnel having the necessary competence and discretion to determine if they are exempt from disclosure under Section 7 of the FOIA or should be revealed only with appropriate deletions;
( ) the request for records cannot be complied with by the public body within the time limits prescribed by 5 ILCS 140/3(d) without unduly burdening or interfering with the operations of the public body;

(xx) there is need for consultation, which shall be conducted with all practicable speed, with another public body or among two or more components of a public body having a substantial interest in the determination or in the subject matter of the request.

Sincerely,

Tom Skelton

FOIA Officer - Department of Law

Hi Sam,

I am working on it. I have the records scanned, but I have been busy and haven't reviewed all of the records yet. You can expect a response either this week or earlier next week I believe.

Sincerely,

Tom Skelton
FOIA Officer
City of Chicago - Department of Law
30 N. LaSalle St. #1720
(312) 744-8853
Thomas.Skelton@cityofchicago.org<mailto:Thomas.Skelton@cityofchicago.org>

December 5, 2019

Sam Stecklow

Via email at requests@muckrock.com

Dear Mr. Stecklow,

On behalf of the City of Chicago Department of Law, I am responding to your Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request which was dated November 1, 2019 and received in our office on the same day. The Law Department took a 5-day extension on November 8, 2019. You requested:

Requesting for the lawsuit Dillon et al v City of Chicago et al 08 C 3640 the depositions of Glover, Coleman, Grubbs, and Gas, and the following CPD records, if they are accessible:

Original Case Incident Report

Any detectives' supplementary reports

The Summary Digest report of a Complaint Register investigation.

Please find the records responsive to your request in a Dropbox at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bmqw2k091qa43hr/AABn8OxCmHev8ekHTg1D9fK6a?dl=0. Please let me know if you are unable to access the Dropbox.

We have redacted certain material pursuant to Section 7(1)(b) of FOIA. That section exempts "private information, unless disclosure is required by another provision of this Act, a State or federal law or a court order." 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(b). Section 2(c-5) defines "private information" as:

unique identifiers, including a person's social security number, driver's license number, employee identification number, biometric identifiers, personal financial information, passwords or other access codes, medical records, home or personal telephone numbers, and personal email addresses. Private information also includes home address and personal license plates, except as otherwise provided by law or when compiled without possibility of attribution to any person.

5 ILCS 140/2(c-5). The material we have redacted under this section is employee ID numbers, home addresses, phone numbers, license plate numbers, and social security numbers. Because these items are specifically exempted under Section 7(1)(b), they have been properly redacted.

We have redacted certain material pursuant to Section 7(1)(c) of FOIA. That section exempts:

[p]ersonal information contained within public records, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, unless the disclosure is consented to in writing by the individual subjects of the information. 'Unwarranted invasion of personal privacy' means the disclosure of information that is highly personal or objectionable to a reasonable person and in in which the subject's right of privacy outweighs any legitimate public interest in obtaining the information. The disclosure of information that bears on the public duties of public employees and officials shall not be considered an invasion of personal privacy.

The material that has been redacted under this section is the names of family members and minors in the records. The release of this information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy because a reasonable person would find the release of this information highly objectionable or personal. Therefore, this material has been properly redacted.

Dates of birth are personal information that is exempt under 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(c). The Public Access Bureau has determined that disclosure of a person's date of birth constitutes an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, and that a person's "right to privacy outweighs any legitimate public interest in disclosure of his or her date of birth." 2012 PAC 19290 (Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr., issued November 2, 2012, at 3), citing 2011 PAC 15360 (Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Pre-Auth. Ltr., issued July 15, 2011). Therefore, the Law Department has properly redacted dates of birth.

Sincerely,

Tom Skelton

FOIA Officer - Department of Law