The Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey recently overturned a significant contempt sanction against a former municipal councilman, spotlighting procedural missteps in the case. The complaint was filed by Mary O’Shea on November 3, 2025, in Bergen County’s Law Division against the Borough of Englewood Cliffs and its records custodian, Laura Borchers. This case underscores the complexities surrounding compliance with the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and highlights critical issues regarding judicial processes.
Mary O’Shea, a resident of Englewood Cliffs, initiated legal action under OPRA after her requests for emails related to borough business were not fulfilled. These emails were allegedly sent by former Council President Tim Koutroubas using both his official borough email and personal Gmail accounts. Despite multiple requests and court orders, O’Shea did not receive the requested documents, prompting her to seek sanctions against Koutroubas for noncompliance. During an April 11, 2024 hearing, Koutroubas claimed no borough business was conducted via his Gmail accounts and admitted to deleting nearly all forwarded emails from these accounts. The trial court found him not credible and imposed a $73,500 contempt sanction for obstructing court proceedings over two years.
The defendants appealed this decision on October 29, 2024. They argued that they had complied with all court orders relevant to OPRA requests and contended that Koutroubas’ personal email accounts fell outside OPRA’s scope as they were not used for borough business. They further asserted that the trial court’s application of Rule 1:10-1 was procedurally flawed. Meanwhile, a partial settlement between O’Shea and the defendants led to an agreement where defendants withdrew their appeal concerning attorney fees while O’Shea agreed not to oppose the remaining appeal regarding sanctions.
Upon review, the appellate judges vacated the contempt sanction due to procedural errors. They noted that Rule 1:10-1 was improperly applied since it pertains to contempt occurring directly in front of a judge—a condition unmet in this case involving discovery order noncompliance under Rule 4:23-2. Additionally, they highlighted that any monetary sanction should adhere to statutory limits—$1,000 under Rule 1:10-1 or $5,000 for repeated OPRA violations—not exceeding $73,500 as initially ordered.
This decision reflects broader principles governing appellate reviews and underscores courts’ responsibility to ensure procedural integrity when exercising contempt powers—an “extraordinary power” reserved for rare circumstances necessitating immediate action against public authority defiance.
The attorneys involved include Gregory D. Emond and Spencer Taffet from Antonelli Kantor Rivera PC representing appellants; Donald M. Doherty Jr., though listed as counsel for respondent Mary O’Shea filed a letter indicating non-participation in this appeal process; Judges Sabatino and Natali presided over this matter with Case ID A-0674-24.
Source: A067424_OShea_v_Borough_of_Englewood_Cliffs_Opinion_New_Jersey_Superior_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
