5045580943 09 18 393.nL 06?03?2015 1I4

Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans

 

STATE OF LOUISIANA
No. 2015 - 04547 Section: 06 
THE LENS ET AL
versus

LANDRIEU MITCHELL J. ET AL

 

Date Case Filed: 5/12/2015

NOTICE OF OF JUDGMENT

TO:

Scott Sternberg Esq 33390
1100 Poydras St Ste 3600

New Orleans LA 70163
Cherrell Simms Esq 28227
1300 Perdidc Street, Suite 5E03

New Orleans LA 70112

In accordance with Article 1913 C.C.P., you are hereby noti?ed that Judgment
in the above entitled and numbered cause was signed on June 1 2015
New Orleans, Louisiana.

June 1 2015

 

 

5045580943 09:19:06 am. 06?03?2015 214

CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA

No. 2015?4547 Division Section 
THE LENS, CHARLES MALDONADO AND ABRAM HANDLER
VERSUS

MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF NEW ORLEANS, AND THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

Filed:

 

 

Deputy Clerk

JUDGMENT

This matter came for hearing on May 29, 2015. The parties are represented as follows:

SCOTT STERNBERG
3600 Entergy Centre
1100 Poydras Street
New Orleans, Louisiana 70163
Attorney for Plaintiffs, he Lens, Charles Maldonado, and Abram Handler

And

CHERRELL R. SIMMS AND SHARONDA WILLIAMS
I300 Perdido Street, Room SE03
New Orleans, Louisiana 70112
Attorneys for Defendants, Mitchell J. Landrieu, in his official capacity as Mayor of the City
of New Orleans, and the City of New Orleans

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Petition for Writ of
Mandamus, Injunctive, and Declaratory Relief, made by Plaintiffs, The Lens, Charles
Maldonado, and Abram Handler, is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs? request

for attorney fees and costs is DENIED.

ORDER, READ, AND SIGNED, this 1 day of JM 2015,

New Orleans, Louisiana.

 

JUDGE KERN A. REESE
DIVISION 

5045580943

09:19:53 am. 06?03?2015

CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA
No. 2015?4547 Division Section 
THE LENS, CHARLES MALDONADO AND ABRAM HANDLER
VERSUS

MITCI-DELL J. LANDRIEU, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF NEW ORLEANS, AND THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

Filed:

 

 

Deputy Clerk
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs herein, The Lens, Charles Maldonado and Abram Handler, have ?led a Petition
for Writ of Mandamus, Injunctive and Declaratory Relief against defendants, Mitchell J.
Landrieu, In His Of?cial Capacity as Mayor of the City of New Orleans, and The City of New
Orleans for alleged noncompliance with the Public Records Law of Louisiana, La. R.S. 44:1, et.
seq., following a series of public records requests commencing on or about January 28, 2015.

Plaintiffs have decried the alleged inordinate delays Defendant, City of New Orleans,
engaged in when not timely answering the requests. Plaintiffs asserted, pursuant to La. C.C.P.
art. 3863 that defendant, Mitchell J. Landrieu, as Mayor of the City of New Orleans, failed in his
ministerial duties in not timely providing the requested information. A hearing was had on May
29, 2015 on the issues presented herein.

The court duly acknowledges the Louisiana constitutional consideration that:

No person shall be denied the right to observe the deliberations of public bodies

and examine public documents, except in cases established by law. La. Const. art.

12, 3.
This court has consistently upheld the right of citizens and various media entities to have access
to public documents. The issue herein has into whether defendant, City of New
Orleans, has habitually taken an inordinate amount of time in formulating responses to Public
Records requests. Plaintiffs seek the extraordinary remedy of injunctive relief to enjoin dilatory
responses in the future. They additionally seek a writ of mandamus: to mandate performance of
this ?mction which has been upheld as a reasonable vehicle to obtain compliance. Vandenweghe
v. Parish of Je?erson, 11?52 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/24/11), 70 So.3d 51.

The Louisiana Public Records Law is NOT hard, fast, and de?nite. There are exceptions.
The court acknowledges that response time may vary depending upon the simplicity or
complexity of the request. Some reSponses may contain privileged information, attorney work
product, personal privacy information, etc. and therefore, must be screened to cull out such
information.

First and foremost, the court fully expects Defendants to comply with Louisiana Public
Records Law. Under La. R.S. defendants are to respond to individuals making public
records requests within three (3) days exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays as to

whether or not the request is indeed a public document susceptible of being provided. Defendant,

2

3M

5045580943 09:21 :06 am. 06?03?2015 4 l4

City of New Orleans, in its response, indicated most responses are ?ll?lled within twelve (12)
days. These cases can only be decided on a case by case basis to ascertain if any unwarranted
recalcitrance or other nefarious motivations are involved.

Since all records requests have been ful?lled, the court DENIES the request for
injunctive relief and writ of mandamus for the reasons stated herein. However, should the
constitutional mandates of access to public documents be abridged, such action will be dealt with

accordingly. Plaintiffs? requests for attorney?s fees and costs are DENIED as well.

ORDER, READ, AND SIGNED, this 1 day of ?New

Orleans, Louisiana.

JUDGE KERN A. 
DIVISION