Petition of New Hampshire Division of State Police

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire reviewed a petition for original jurisdiction concerning an order requiring the New Hampshire Division of State Police, a nonparty, to produce a pre-employment background investigation file. The court held that although the trial court erred by ordering production without service of a subpoena, the error was not prejudicial because the Division received adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard. The court further held that RSA 516:36, II does not shield a pre-employment investigation file from discovery and affirmed the trial court's order.

Holdings

1. A party seeking discovery from a nonparty must ordinarily serve a subpoena, and the superior court erred by compelling the Division to produce the file without one. The error did not warrant reversal because the Division received notice and an opportunity to be heard materially equivalent to those provided by the subpoena process and therefore suffered no prejudice.
2. RSA 516:36, II does not shield a pre-employment background investigation file from discovery because the statute applies to inquiries into the conduct of an officer, employee, or agent of the investigating law-enforcement agency, not an applicant or candidate for employment.
3. The superior court properly treated Trottier's motion as a civil-discovery request rather than a Right-to-Know Law petition. The Division's prior denial of Trottier's records request did not require the court to end its analysis under RSA chapter 91-A because Trottier had not brought a separate Right-to-Know action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the superior court had authority to compel a nonparty governmental agency to produce discovery without service of a subpoena and, if so, whether the absence of a subpoena prejudiced the Division.
2. Whether RSA 516:36, II shields a law-enforcement agency's pre-employment background investigation file from discovery.
3. Whether the motion to compel had to be analyzed under the Right-to-Know Law rather than ordinary civil-discovery rules.

Disposition

affirmed