Commonwealth, Office of Open Records v. Center Township
95 A.3d 354
Pa. Commw. Ct.2014Background
- Beverly Schenck requested solicitor’s invoices from Center Township for Dec 2012–Apr 2013 under RTKL.
- Township redacted portions of invoices they claimed related to litigation.
- OOR directed Township to log privileges; Township refused to provide logs.
- OOR ordered in camera review; Township refused to participate, citing lack of authority.
- OOR filed a Petition to Enforce Order; panel referred to Joint Motion for Summary Relief.
- Court grants OOR summary relief, ordering production for in camera inspection within 30 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OOR has subject matter jurisdiction to determine privilege. | OOR has RTKL jurisdiction to determine privilege. | Silver confines OOR’s role; privilege questions fall under Supreme Court authority. | OOR has subject matter jurisdiction to determine privilege. |
| Whether OOR has authority to conduct in camera review. | RTKL implies authority for in camera review upon request. | RTKL has no explicit grant; SB 444 does not create new power. | OOR has implied authority to conduct in camera review when requested. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Pittsburgh v. Silver, 50 A.3d 296 (Pa.Cmwlth.2012) (RTKL cannot compel disclosure conflicting with Pa.R.P.C. 1.6 ethics rule in Silver)
- Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 621 Pa.133 (Pa.2013) (RTKL permits in camera review; broad discretion to OOR)
- Levy v. Senate of Pennsylvania, 619 Pa.586 (Pa.2013) (In camera review used to assess attorney privilege)