Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) provides New Yorkers with a vital tool to access government records, promoting transparency and accountability. However, FOIL requests are not limitless, and agencies are not required to produce records that cannot be located despite a diligent search. The recent decision in Matter of Madrid v. Mazur, 243 A.D.3d 481(App. Div. 2d Dept’ 2025) demonstrates the courts’ strict adherence to this principle.

The petitioner sought records related to his arrest, submitting a FOIL request more than 16 years after the incident. When the New York City Police Department (NYPD) was unable to locate the requested records, it issued a certification pursuant to Public Officers Law §89(3), stating that the records could not be found after a diligent search. The petitioner then challenged the agency’s response through a proceeding under C.P.L.R. Article 78, arguing that the NYPD’s reply was deficient and that the requested records likely existed.

The Supreme Court rejected the petitioner’s challenge, holding that the NYPD’s response was not “affected by an error of law” and that the agency properly complied with its obligations under FOIL. The court emphasized that the statute does not require a detailed description of the search or a personal statement from the employee who conducted it, and the agency’s certification alone is sufficient to satisfy §89(3). The petitioner failed to provide a factual basis suggesting that the requested records existed, and therefore the court affirmed dismissal of the Article 78 proceeding.

This decision underscores two important points for FOIL requesters: first, agencies are only required to conduct a diligent search, not guarantee the existence of records; second, the certification that records cannot be located is legally sufficient to deny access when the search comes up empty. As courts have consistently recognized, FOIL is designed to ensure reasonable access to government information, but it does not create a limitless right to obtain records long lost or no longer in possession of the agency.

For individuals seeking access to old or potentially missing records, this case highlights the practical limitations of FOIL and the importance of timely requests. Agencies meet their legal obligations when they certify that a diligent search failed to locate the records, even years after the underlying event.

Giulia R. Marino, Esq.