Records Access Appeals Officer

Division of Legal Affairs

Empire State Plaza
2438 Corning Tower
Albany, NY 12237-0026
Dear Appeals Officer,
I am appealing the denial of Freedom of Informatjon Law request 16-01-218.
In regard to the denial based on New York Public Officers Law Section 96, case law
dealing with the Department of Health has found that if something pertains to an
individual acting in his or her business or professional capacity, those activities are
not personal. The FOIL request asked for names and specialties of physicians who
have completed the training to recommend patients for medical marijuana. This
ability to recommend medical marijuana would be in keeping with the physicians
professional capacity and therefore should be covered under the FOIL request.
The department acknowledged that a physician who is not certified can refer
patients to a doctor who is. Please cite the statute that allows information to be
public to some people but not to all people.
In regard to the denial based on Section 87, the Department of Health bears the
burden of proof that releasing the physician names in this instance could endanger
the life or safety of any person. Wouldnt the practice of having other physicians
refer patients to the consenting physicians put those consenting physicians at risk?
If so, then no patients would be able to access a legally available medicine.
With the names of physicians available to a subset of the population, and the
department unable to substantiate a claim of potential danger to the safety of
practitioners, I request the information in parts 1 and 2 of FOIL request 16-01-218.
Thank you.

Regards,

Endg life or safety?

ON th privacy issues.
Rationale:
There is case laws that dealitht hhealth dept in volveing records idenitfiealb eto
pyhsiciasn. Genearnotialn is if something pertains to an indivudal acting in his or

her business of profeinoa cacpaticy, its not personal. Therefor, the privacy
expcetoin would not apply.
Not personal. Deals with actiongin in rpfesoin capacity.

Life or safety.
Name still is provided to the public through another physician.
Name made public to a subset, which makes the names public.
If available to one, should be available to all.
Meet burden of proff.

Records Access Appeals Officer

Division of Legal Affairs
Empire State Plaza
2438 Corning Tower
Albany, NY 12237-0026

Dear Appeals Officer,

I am appealing the denial of Freedom of Informatjon Law request 16-01-218.
In regard to the denial based on New York Public Officers Law Section 96, case law
dealing with the health department has found that if something pertains to an
individual acting in his or her business or professional capacity, those activities are
not personal. The FOIL request asked for names and specialties of physicians who
have completed the training to recommend patients for medical marijuana. This
ability to recommend medical marijuana would be in keeping with the physicians
professional capacity and therefore should be covered under the FOIL request.
The department acknowledged that a physician who is not certified can refer
patients to a doctor who is. Please cite the statute that makes information public to
some people but not to all people.
In regard to the denial based on Section 87, the Department of Health bears the
burden of proof that releasing the physician names in this instance could endanger
the life or safety of any person. Wouldnt the practice of having other physicians
refer patients to the consenting physicians put those individuals at risk? If so, then
no one would be able to access a legally available medicine.

With the names of physicians available to a subset of the population, and the
department unable to substantiate a claim of potential danger to safety of
practitioners, I request the information in parts 1 and 2 of FOIL request 16-01-218.

Regards,

The request was denied based in part on New York Public Officers Law Section 87(2)
(a)

Voluntarily giving consent to be on a list available to other physicians, which is

made public upon request.