One decision yesterday.
This case deals with access to Office of Professional Regulation (OPR) files. Mr. Wool is an involuntary guest at the Chateau de Vermont aka “The Big House.” He filed a “disciplinary complaint against a psychologist, alleging that the psychologist had falsified certain scores in a risk assessment and that these scores force him to ‘max out’ his sentence and serve fourteen additional years of incarceration.” While that investigation was open, Mr. Wool wrote to OPR, requesting a copy of whatever records the psychologist had filed with OPR to help support Mr. Wool’s complaint. OPR responded that the case was under investigation and denied the request. So, Mr. Wool filed a writ of mandamus in the superior court, civil division, seeking an order to disclose these records—the psychologist’s filings—to him. The trial court dismissed on grounds that Mr. Wool lacked standing and had failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted. SCOV concludes that while Mr. Wool does have standing, he has no substantive constitutional right to the psychologist’s OPR filings. Accordingly, the trial court was okay dismissing the writ. Wool v. Office of Professional Regulation, 2020 VT 44.