City of Pittsburgh v. Silver
2012 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 247
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2012Background
- City of Pittsburgh appeals RTKL Final Determination directing disclosure of settlement-related correspondence between Mitchell family counsel and City officials.
- October 1, 2010 request sought all correspondence in the assistant city solicitor’s file regarding settlement discussions of Curtis Mitchell’s death.
- City denied as not public records—asserted attorney work-product, attorney-client privilege, and Rule 408 protections.
- OOR sustained the appeal (Jan. 21, 2011) ordering disclosure; trial court conducted in camera review.
- Trial court found ten letters and one fax not subject to asserted privileges; ordered disclosure; City timely appealed.
- This Court reverses, holding RTKL cannot compel disclosure of material in an attorney’s case file where the Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the practice of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RTKL can compel disclosure of attorney-file settlement communications. | Silver/ Gazette argues records are public RTKL records. | City contends records fall within attorney work-product/attorney-client privileges and may be shielded; Legislature cannot override Supreme Court control over practice of law. | RTKL cannot compel disclosure; OOR lacked jurisdiction over attorney-file settlement materials. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beyers v. Richmond, 594 Pa. 654 (Pa. 2007) (Supreme Court exclusive jurisdiction over attorney conduct under Article V, §10(c))
- Commonwealth v. Stern, 549 Pa. 505 (Pa. 1997) (Supreme Court exclusive power to regulate the practice of law)
- Laudenberger v. Port Authority of Allegheny County, 496 Pa. 52 (Pa. 1981) (Court recognizes sole authority over the conduct of litigation and settlement discussions)
- Gmerek v. State Ethics Comm., 751 A.2d 1241 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000) (Supreme Court rules on investigation of lawyers; cited for practice-of-law authority)
- Newspaper Holdings, Inc. v. New Castle Area School Dist., 911 A.2d 644 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006) (Settlement records may be subject to RTKL when they fix rights or involve public funds)
- Tribune-Review Publishing Co. v. Westmoreland County Housing Authority, 833 A.2d 112 (Pa. 2003) (Settlement agreements/public records policy in RTKL context)
- Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, Messer, Shilobod & Gutnick, 526 Pa. 541 (Pa. 1991) (Settlement policy and public access considerations)
- McDermott, Inc. v. AmClyde, 511 U.S. 202 (U.S. 1994) (Settlement-related disclosures in broader public policy context)
- Lloyd v. Fishinger, 529 Pa. 513 (Pa. 1992) (Attorney conduct regulation exclusively governed by Supreme Court rules)