The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 28, 2013.  At the hearing, the complainant and the respondents Resident State Trooper, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety and State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  During the hearing, the Hearing Officer determined that the Police Department for the Town of East Lyme ("ELPD") was a necessary party for the proper disposition of this case and added ELPD as a party respondent.  The Hearing Officer continued the hearing to April 12, 2013, at which time the complainant appeared, however, the respondent ELPD failed to appear.  Counsel for the respondent ELPD moved for a continuance of the April 12, 2013 hearing and the complainant objected to such motion.  The Hearing Officer granted the respondent ELPD's motion for continuance and denied the complainant's motion to reconsider granting the respondent ELPD's motion for continuance.  The Hearing Officer further continued the April 12, 2013 hearing to April 18, 2013, at which time the complainant, and the respondent ELPD appeared and informed the Hearing Officer that the parties were in the process of trying to resolve the complaint and that both parties agreed that they wished to conduct an off the record settlement conference, which the hearing officer stated could take place so long as he was not present.

     After the Hearing Officer was called back into the hearing room, the parties indicated that they reached the terms of an agreement in resolution of this contested case.  The complainant and the respondent ELPD have agreed that:  1) the respondent ELPD will search for and provide to the complainant a copy of form DD-214 and a 2008 letter from Sergeant Wilfred Blanchette of the State Police; and 2)  If the respondent ELPD is unable to locate the requested records, the respondent ELPD will provide the complainant with a letter, notifying him that it conducted a search of its records and that the requested records are not in the possession of the respondent ELPD.

     Based on such statements of counsel for the respondent ELPD, the complainant stated that he would withdraw his complaint in this contested case. 

     For purposes of hearing, the above captioned matter was consolidated with Docket #FIC 2012-265, David Godbout v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, Division of State Police; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, Division of State Police; and Docket #FIC 2013-032, David Godbout v. Chief, Police Department, Town of East Lyme; and Police Department, Town of East Lyme.

     The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

     1.  Based on the withdrawal of the complaint, the complaint is dismissed.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of May 22, 2013.

__________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

David Godbout
15 Cardinal Road
East Lyme, CT  06333

Resident State Trooper, State of Connecticut,
Department of Public Safety; State of Connecticut,
Department of Public Safety;
c/o Terrence M. O’Neill, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
State of Connecticut,
Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT  06105

Police Department,
Town of East Lyme,
c/o Mark S. Zamarka, Esq.
Waller, Smith & Palmer, P.C.
52 Eugene O’Neill Drive
P.O. Box 88
New London, CT  06320

____________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC/2012-404/FD/cac/5/22/2013