[§92F-3]  General definitions. 
Unless the context otherwise requires, in this chapter:



"Agency" means any unit of government
in this State, any county, or any combination of counties; department;
institution; board; commission; district; council; bureau; office; governing
authority; other instrumentality of state or county government; or corporation
or other establishment owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of this
State or any county, but does not include the nonadministrative functions of
the courts of this State.



"Government record" means information
maintained by an agency in written, auditory, visual, electronic, or other
physical form.



"Individual" means a natural person.



"Person" means an individual,
corporation, government, or governmental subdivision or agency, business trust,
estate, trust, partnership, association, or any other legal entity.



"Personal record" means any item,
collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained
by an agency.  It includes, but is not limited to, the individual's education,
financial, medical, or employment history, or items that contain or make
reference to the individual's name, identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice
print or a photograph. [L 1988, c 262, pt of §1]



 



Case Notes



 



  Nonprofit corporation was not an "agency" within
the meaning of this section where because: (1) it was the sole title owner of
its equipment and the lessee of its offices and facilities, it was not
"owned" by the State; (2) the State did not manage its day-to-day
operations and its employees were not state employees, it was not
"operated" by the State; (3) the State did not control, direct, or
exercise skill or judgment over corporation's activities or business affairs,
it was not "managed" by the State; and (4) corporation's activities
were not a required function of any government agency, it did not perform a
government function "on behalf of" the State.  116 H. 337, 173 P.3d
484.



  Where trial court determined that any unaccepted engineering
reports were returned to the developer and there was  a lack of evidence
suggesting that the city planning and permitting department "maintained"
any reports or copies of the reports that were unaccepted by the department,
trial court properly determined that, pursuant to this chapter, the reports
submitted to the department in connection with the developer's subdivision
application did not constitute "government records" prior to their
acceptance by the department.  119 H. 90, 194 P.3d 531.