In Matter of Reclaim the Records v City of New York, the Appellate Division, First Department, addressed a dispute over access to historical marriage records under New York’s Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). The petitioner, Reclaim the Records, is a nonprofit organization dedicated to making genealogical and historical records publicly accessible. The case centered on the organization’s request for marriage records and metadata spanning the last century, which the City partially denied.
Initially, the City granted access to 12 fields of data from 2018 onward but withheld five specific fields: previous marriages, current place of residence, place of birth, parents’ names and birthplaces, and spouses’ forms of identification. The denial was based on FOIL exemptions under Public Officers Law § 87(2)(a) and (b), citing Domestic Relations Law § 19 and privacy concerns. After an administrative appeal upheld the denial, the petitioners filed an Article 78 proceeding to compel full disclosure.
The Supreme Court ruled that the City properly withheld those five sensitive fields for records less than 50 years old, recognizing the privacy risks posed by releasing such personal information. However, the court initially ordered disclosure of those same fields for records older than 50 years. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the judgment, extending the exemption to records at least 50 years old, reasoning that privacy concerns persist regardless of age. The court emphasized that the nature of the withheld data—such as identification documents and parental information—still warrants protection and requires a “proper purpose” for disclosure under Domestic Relations Law § 19.
Additionally, the appellate court vacated the award of attorneys’ fees to the petitioners, finding that the City had a reasonable basis for denying access to the disputed records. The decision underscores the tension between public access to historical data and the enduring need to safeguard personal privacy, even in records that may seem purely archival.
Genealogy meets bureaucracy—because even 50-year-old secrets deserve a little privacy.
# # #
DECISION