In an unpublished opinion, a trial judge denied Teaneck’s application to enjoin a requestor from filing OPRA requests, despite the fact that the requestor had submitted an excessive and abusive amount of OPRA requests. Twp. of Teaneck v. Jones.

The judge’s decision rests on the premise that OPRA does not authorize public bodies to obtain such an injunction. But this misses the key point that the Supreme Court has said that the courts do have the power to restrain requestors who file excessive, unreasonable public records requests.

It’s hard to imagine a clearer example of the need for such judicial control than the Jones case. In just two months, Jones submitted 380 requests, all of which were multi-part. These requests, “the size and heft of a phone book,” according to the judge, sought nearly every possible category of municipal information. And there seems to be no dispute that the requestor did not really want any records, but instead had filed this avalanche of requests to harass Township officials.

There’s no indication whether Teaneck plans to appeal. This case shows that appellate guidance is necessary, to confirm that public bodies may seek injunctions where OPRA requestors abuse the system.