Court Opinion

ID: 6581933
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 19:38:59.646441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:57:19.203933
License: Public Domain

Pardee, J.
For the information of the public the state of Connecticut publishes reports of eases argued and detertermined in the Supreme Court of Errors. The volume is prepared for publication by the official reporter, and contains the opinions written by the judges, together with head-notes to all cases, foot-notes to some of them, statements of facts, a table of cases, and an index to subjects, the work of the reporter. The judges and the reporter are paid by the state, and the product of their mental labor is the property of the state, and the state, as it might lawfully do, has taken to itself the copyright. The statute requires the comptroller to supervise the publication of the volumes, taking a copyright for the benefit of the state. Under this statute that officer for a valuable consideration granted to Banks & Brothers, who agree to print and sell the reports at a fixed price, the protection of the copyright for a limited period. During three or four years the state, with knowledge, has acquiesced in the terms of this contract and accepted the resulting benefits. If, therefore, we should now direct the reporter to furnish copies of opinions to the petitioners, that they may sell them to the public, in advance, for their own profit, we should in effect advise the state to a breach of contract.
It is for the state to say when and in what manner it will publish these volumes; and the taking of the copyright in no sense offends the rule that judicial proceedings shall be public. The courts and their records are open to all. The reasons given by the Supreme Court of Errors for its determination in a given cause constitute no part of the record therein; the judgment stands independently of these. Moreover, these are accessible to all who desire to use them in the enforcement of their rights.
The application for an order that the reporter furnish copies of all opinions to the petitioners is denied.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.