In the Matter of the Expungement of the Mental Health Record of T.B.
Docket No. A-1410-23
Decided June 25, 2025
In the Matter of the Expungement of the Mental Health Record of T.B. opinion
Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark
In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided appellant, T.B.’s, appeal from an order denying his motion to expunge mental health records prepared and maintained in connection with his civil commitment in 1983 to Ancora Psychiatric Hospital.
In May 2023, T.B. moved to expunge records held by the Superior Court of his four-day involuntary commitment to a psychiatric hospital in July 1983. The court heard oral argument on various dates in August and October 2023. The court admitted into evidence medical records pertaining to T.B.’s prior commitment, as well as documentation provided by Dr. David Dada, a psychiatrist who evaluated T.B. in connection with his expungement application. T.B. was the sole witness to offer testimony at the hearing. T.B. testified that what prompted his expungement application was to purchase a gun for target practice with his friends. After learning that the denial was attributable to his prior psychiatric commitment, T.B. initiated proceedings to have the records expunged. T.B. further testified that “my adulteress ex-wife gave me some pills that I took, and then had me hallucinating pretty badly. So they sent me down to Ancora, because she said I tried to kill her, amongst other things. And after being questioned, they determined that I didn’t belong there, and they released me.”
The court reviewed Dr. Dada’s June 2022 evaluation report. The doctor found T.B. “very talkative,” “shaky/trembling,” “feeling angry,” in “too much pain,” and experiencing “memory problems.” Dr. Dada also diagnosed T.B. with an adjustment disorder and anxiety. However, in his August 14, 2023 evaluation, Dr. Dada concluded T.B. was neither “manic or psychotic” nor “a danger to himself or others.” The court also considered an October 2023 letter authored by a nurse practitioner stating T.B. was in good physical, psychological, and mental condition” and received medication for diabetes and hyperlipidemia.
After hearing the arguments of counsel, the trial court determined that T.B.’s mental health had not substantially improved or was in remission. The court acknowledged that although T.B. had no history or mental health treatment beyond his hospitalization in 1983, the court also noted that because the commitment occurred forty years ago, it was difficult to assess his condition at that time with certainty. The court gave little weight to the October 2023 letter, noting it was not a certified medical document, did not include an actual examination, and contained only general conclusions rather than detailed medical findings. The trial court ultimately found that credibility concerns, incomplete medical records, and T.B.’s limited awareness of his physical condition and medications collectively caused reasonable doubt as to his threat to public safety. Regarding his present condition, the court noted that despite the medical reports stating he was stable, T.B. exhibited signs of memory problems and a lack of awareness regarding his own medication regimen. As a result, the court concluded that expungement would be contrary to the public interest. T.B. subsequently appealed.
On appeal, T.B. contended that the trial court improperly relied on his current physical condition, age, and stated reasons for seeking expungement in reaching its decision. Under N.J.S.A. 30:4-80.8, T.B. has the burden to demonstrate that his illness has either “substantially improved” or is in “substantial remission” since his discharge from a mental health facility.
After reviewing the petition to expunge T.B.’s mental health records de novo, the Appellate Court agreed with the trial court and affirmed its decision. The Appellate Court noted that the trial court acknowledged that the forty-year interval between T.B.’s 1983 hospitalization and subsequent evaluation was substantial, rendering problematic a finding as to whether T.B.’s condition was “substantially improved” or was in “substantial remission” pursuant to N.J.S.A. 30:4-80.8. The court found that the trial court acted within its discretion in connecting T.B.’s plain lack of credibility to its assessment of this threshold issue. The court further found that under these circumstances, the trial court properly and decisively focused on the factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 30:4-80.9, namely public safety and public interest, and that its findings were adequately supported by substantial evidence in the record. Thus, the Appellate Court concluded that that the trial court reasonably determined that defendant failed to meet its burden to demonstrate the expungement was in the public interest.
At Hark & Hark, we are experienced attorneys who represent clients in Superior Court for issues like the previously discussed case pertaining to petitions to expunge mental health/psychiatric records. We work hard to ensure that our clients receive exceptional representation in order for them to receive the most favorable outcome in their case as a result.
We offer payment plan options to clients financially incapable of providing full payment upfront. If you are facing a similar situation to that of the appellant in this case, please call us to discuss the matter. At Hark & Hark, we represent clients for any case in any county in New Jersey including Atlantic County, Bergen County, Burlington County, Camden County, Cape May County, Cumberland County, Essex County, Gloucester County, Hudson County, Hunterdon County, Mercer County, Middlesex County, Monmouth County, Morris County, Ocean County, Passaic County, Salem County, Somerset County, Sussex County, Union County, and Warren County and any town including Audubon, Gloucester City, Oaklyn, Audubon Park, Gloucester Township, Pennsauken, Barrington, Haddon Heights, Pine Hill, Bellmawr, Haddon Township, Pine Valley, Berlin Borough, Haddonfield, Runnemede, Berlin Township, Hi-Nella, Somerdale, Brooklawn, Laurel Springs, Stratford, Camden, Lawnside, Voorhees, Cherry Hill, Lindenwold, Waterford, Chesilhurst, Magnolia, Winslow, Clementon, Merchantville, Woodlynne, Collingswood, Mt. Ephraim, and Gibbsboro.
