MANCHESTER — A judge has ruled in favor of the Union Leader Corp. in a lawsuit seeking the identity of a man police suspected of starting a fire at an apartment complex by smoking while using an oxygen tank.

Judge Kenneth R. McHugh issued his ruling Tuesday, denying the City of Laconia's claim that the identity was protected under federal and state privacy laws.

“In conducting such a balancing test in this case, the court has no difficulty finding that there is a legitimate public interest that trumps the individual's right to privacy,” McHugh wrote in the four-page ruling. “An individual smoking a cigarette while using an oxygen tank in a facility wherin other people reside raises general safety issues and therefore is of public interest.”

McHugh also ruled that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act did not preclude the city from releasing the man's name.

The city has 30 days to appeal the ruling. Attorney Walter Mitchell, who represented the city, did not immediately return a call seeking comment. The Jan. 28 fire started at the Millview Apartment Complex, a quasi-public nonprofit entity owned by the Laconia Area Community Land Trust Inc. The Union Leader filed the lawsuit after receiving a police incident report on the fire in which all references to the man and his identity were redacted.

Attorney Gregory Sullivan of the Malloy and Sullivan law practice in Manchester represented the Union Leader. He said the newspaper was not asking for any medical or health information, just the name of the man as it appeared on the public documents.

“We were very pleased with the court's ruling,” Sullivan said Thursday. “There has been much confusion at the local level regarding HIPPA and its privacy requirements. We believe the court made the right call with respect to the facts and records in this case.”

The city also noted the man, who suffered severe burns in the fire, did not wish to have his name released. McHugh struck that down, too.

“That is by far the weakest argument the defendant can make, as presumably most people who are involved in some type of incident involving fire and police do not want their names disclosed,” the judge wrote. “The public interest that the court has alluded to outweighs the individual's expressed right to privacy.”

dalden@unionleader.com