Newspaper owner filed petition pursuant to Right-to-Know Law for disclosure of arbitration decision concerning termination of police officer by city for misconduct.
Superior Court denied the petition. Owner appealed.
The Supreme Court held that:
- Stare decisis factors compelled overruling prior holding to the extent it broadly interpreted the internal personnel practices exemption of the Right-to-Know Law and its progeny to the extent they relied on that broad interpretation;
- Internal personnel practices exemption of the Right-to-Know Law applies narrowly to records pertaining to internal rules and practices governing an agency’s operations and employee relations, overruling Union Leader Corp. v. Fenniman, 136 N.H. 624, 620 A.2d 1039, Hounsell v. North Conway Water Precinct, 154 N.H. 1, 903 A.2d 987;
- Arbitration decision did not fall within internal personnel practices exemption; and
- Owner was not entitled to attorney fees under Right-to-Know Law.