Herald Association v. Dean
Vermont Supreme Court
816 A.2d 469 (2002)

- Written by Laura Julien, JD
Facts
Publishers of various newspapers circulated throughout Vermont, including the Herald Association (the publishers) (plaintiffs), filed a request under Vermont’s open-records law for the daily schedule of the state’s governor, Howard Dean (defendant). The publishers were trying to ascertain how much time Dean spent on nongubernatorial activities and, specifically, his presidential campaign. The daily schedule included a variety of public and private events. Some of the business-related items on the calendar included descriptions of policy questions and topics to be discussed at the meetings. Dean denied the publishers’ request, citing the common-law executive privilege. The publishers filed suit, seeking the disclosure of the records. The publishers asserted that the steps that the governor was taking to pursue a presidential campaign while holding public office were matters of public interest. The publishers further clarified that they were not interested in any of the personal information contained in the calendar, such as medical appointments, and agreed to that information being redacted. Dean continued to refuse to produce the calendar. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the publishers, holding that Dean could not claim executive privilege with regard to his calendar because the calendar contained only factual information and did not reveal information related to policy or decision-making processes. Dean filed an appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Morse, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Skoglund, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.