[MHGinTN]

As far as I can tell, re-reading clarifies nothing beyond what I posted. Leo is erroneously praising a staff lawyer who has remained solidly on the side of the DOH restricting access, against state previous OIPA procedures.

At the end of the letter from Linden H. Joestring, staff attorney, whom Leo is so positive about, we find the following continuing misdirection/obfuscation:

The DOH has taken the position that any related documents are also covered by the statute’s restrictions. This is based on the statute’s wording that no disclosure, inspection or copy of “all or any part of any record” is permitted except as authorized by the statute. … The statute restricts access only to those who stand in a specific relationship to the person whose record is requested. … The DOH’s interpretation of the UIPA and section 338-18, H.R.S. are correct.

[Red Steel]

The DOH has taken the position that any related documents are also covered by the statute’s restrictions. This is based on the statute’s wording that no disclosure, inspection or copy of “all or any part of any record” is permitted except as authorized by the statute. …

Not if Donofrio can get Hawaii to separate the "indicative data" from the specific records.

[Danae]

There is more to come, there is more to the story! Leo and Terry are not done yet!