Right-to-Know & Media Law Archives - Page 9 of 14

Right-to-Know Update – What Businesses Working with the Government Should Know

Businesses that supply goods or services to government agencies at any level must be aware that some portion of the documents exchanged with the agency and the information contained there will be a public record. Six years into Pennsylvania’s “new” Right-to-Know Law, many businesses are finding that information involving contracts, responses to RFPs and payments made to and received by government agencies are accessible by citizens… Read On

The OOR is Still Required to Consider a Requester’s Appeal on the Merits Prior to Appellate Review

The Commonwealth Court held in Kokinda v. County of Lehigh, No. 1146 C.D. 2014 (Pa. Cmwlth. Jan. 8, 2014) that the Pennsylvania appellate courts’ broad scope of review in RTKL cases does not eliminate the OOR’s obligation to carry out fact finding and consider a requester’s appeal on the merits. The holding reaffirms the OOR’s importance within the RTKL hierarchy… Read On

Agency-Issued Phone Numbers and Email Addresses of DPW Caseworkers are Exempt from Public Disclosure Under the Right-to-Know Law

The Commonwealth Court has reaffirmed that individually assigned phone numbers and email addresses issued by government agencies to government employees are not public records. Dep’t of Public Welfare v. Clofine, 706 C.D. 2013 (Pa.Cmwlth. 11/27/13)(unpublished memorandum opinion). In Clofine, the requester submitted a request to DPW for the names and direct phone numbers of the income maintenance caseworkers in the Adams County Assistance Office and for the direct phone number and email address for one identified caseworker. … Read On

Top Ten Most Significant Right-to-Know Cases of 2013 … and Coming Attractions for 2014

Top Ten Most Significant Right-to-Know Cases of 2013 1. Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 75 A.3d 453 (Pa. 2013)(McCaffery, J.; Saylor, J. concurring; Castille, J. & Todd, J. dissenting). The Supreme Court finally established the standard and scope of review in right-to-know cases by affirming the opinion of Commonwealth Court Judge Robin Simpson from 2010. … Read On

Commonwealth Court Reestablishes Waiver in RTKL Cases

The Commonwealth Court has held that an agency waives any challenges to public disclosure that the agency fails to raise in the initial fact-finding proceedings. Levy v. Senate of Pennsylvania (Levy II), — A.3d —-, 2222 C.D. 2010 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1/15/2014). The Court rejected an argument frequently raised by agencies, that a record containing some privileged or exempt information is entirely exempt from public disclosure. … Read On

Right-to-Know Law Does Not Reach Records of Privately Managed Economic Development and Tourism Agency

The requester submitted a request for records concerning the Oil Region Alliance of Business, Industry and Tourism (“Alliance”), an entity established to promote economic development, recreation and tourism in two counties in northwestern Pennsylvania. The Alliance denied the request, asserting that it was not an “agency” required to comply with the Right-to-Know Law. The Office of Open Records… Read On

Pennsylvania State Police Can Withhold Names of MPOETC Accredited Officers

The Commonwealth Court has held that the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) do not have to release the names and departments of police officers accredited by the Municipal Police Officer’s Education and Training Commission (MPOETC) because PSP does not have the ability to determine whether such officers are engaged in undercover or covert law enforcement activities. Andrew McGill… Read On

Supreme Court Holds Agency Gatherings Convened Solely for the Purpose of Collecting Information Do Not Violate Sunshine Act

In Smith v. Township of Richmond, — A.3d –, No. 34 MAP 2013 (Dec. 17, 2013), the Supreme Court held that the Sunshine Act does not prohibit agencies from convening with litigation parties behind closed doors if the purpose of the gathering is information collection and agency member education and no “deliberation” or “official action” occurs… Read On

Ambivalence Toward PA’s Right-to-Know Law is a Mistake

In 2009, the General Assembly enacted the most sweeping revisions of Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law in its history. The new law created a presumption that a record in the possession of the government was public unless otherwise exempt. Millions of documents in the hands of local and state government that previously would not have been accessible by the public were now available… Read On

Immunity Agreements Are Not Per Se Exempt From Disclosure under the RTKL

In Coley v. Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, No. 317 C.D. 2013 (Pa. Cmwlth. October 7, 2013), the Commonwealth Court, in an opinion by Judge Leavitt, addressed whether witness statements and an immunity agreement contained in a District Attorney’s (“DA”) file were exempt from disclosure under the RTKL. The court held that the witness statements were exempt from disclosure… Read On

Rare Award of Attorney’s Fees in Right-to-Know Law Case Upheld by Commonwealth Court

On October 3, 2013, the Commonwealth Court issued Staub and the Citizens’ Voice v. City of Wilkes-Barre and LAG Towing, Inc., No. 2140 C.D. 2012 (Pa. Cmwlth. September 12, 2013), an Unreported Memorandum Opinion, penned by President Judge Pellegrini. The court upheld the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas order directing the City of Wilkes-Barre (“City”) to pay 10% of the costs the Citizens’ Voice newspaper incurred litigating its RTK request. … Read On

Trial Court Finds Right-to-Know Law Supersedes Private Contractual Agreement Limiting the Discoverability of Documents

Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas issued a decision on September 17, 2013, in Mid Valley School Dist. v. Warshawer, No. 13 CV 1528, which held: (1) The disclosure requirements of the Right-to-Know Law (“RTKL”) superseded discovery restrictions contained in a private contractual agreement between a school district and a contractor… Read On