Cohn Lifland is pleased to announce that attorneys Christina N. Stripp, Walter M. Luers, and Michael Alderman successfully secured a significant victory in the New Jersey Appellate Division in a case addressing public access to police body-worn camera (“BWC”) recordings. The decision arose from litigation concerning whether certain BWC recordings made by municipal police officers in Spotswood, New Jersey must be disclosed under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and the state’s Body Worn Camera Law (“BWCL”).
In its opinion, the Appellate Division reversed key portions of the trial court’s ruling and clarified the relationship between the BWCL and OPRA. The court held that the recordings at issue could not automatically be destroyed or withheld from disclosure simply because officers allegedly failed to verbally notify a person that they were being recorded. Instead, the court determined that the statutory provisions governing body-worn cameras must be interpreted together in a way that preserves evidence and promotes transparency.
The court also concluded that the recordings constitute “government records” under OPRA, even if questions exist about how they were created, because they were received and maintained by law enforcement in the course of official duties.
As a result of the decision, the matter has been remanded for further review of limited redactions rather than wholesale nondisclosure of the recordings.
Why this Decision Matters
The ruling provides important guidance on the intersection of New Jersey’s body-worn camera law and public records law. By clarifying that technical issues in how recordings were made do not automatically eliminate public access rights, the decision reinforces OPRA’s strong policy favoring transparency while still allowing agencies to protect sensitive information through appropriate redactions.
The case also establishes helpful guidance for how courts should interpret potentially conflicting statutory provisions within the BWCL and confirms that recordings maintained by law enforcement agencies remain subject to OPRA’s definition of government records.
The Team Behind the Victory
Christina N. Stripp argued the matter on behalf of our client in the Appellate Division, with Walter M. Luers handling the briefing and Michael Alderman making significant contributions to the overall representation. Their collaborative effort reflects Cohn Lifland’s team-based approach to handling complex matters, where strategic coordination and shared insight drive successful outcomes for our clients. We congratulate the team on this important appellate win and their continued success advocating for clients in complex public records and governmental litigation matters.
If you need guidance or representation in OPRA or public records matters, contact us today!