Coulter v. Department of Public Welfare
65 A.3d 1085
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2013Background
- Requester sought DPW records related to a noncriminal investigation of Butler County CYS and foster care placement; she attached a September 29, 2011 DPW Sec.'s letter.
- DPW granted in part and denied in part, providing names of investigators but denying notes, internal correspondence, and various versions of reports as noncriminal investigative records under RTKL §708(b)(17)(ii).
- OOR determined the records were exempt under the noncriminal investigation exemption and that notes/internal correspondence were not challenged; the sole issue was correspondence with CYS and report versions.
- DPW relied on Elaine Bobick’s unsworn statement to prove the investigation was noncriminal; Requester argued the statement lacked oath and personal knowledge.
- Petition for review challenged the sufficiency of Bobick’s unsworn statement; court noted the request principally sought documents arising from a noncriminal investigation under DPW’s regulatory authority.
- Court held the request falls within the plain language of the noncriminal investigation exemption and affirmed the OOR; DPW’s motion to supplement the record was denied as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DPW met the noncriminal investigation exemption burden | Requester contends Bobick’s unsworn statement lacks oath/personal knowledge. | DPW argues the exemption applies and Bobick’s statement suffices as evidence. | Exemption satisfied; DPW proved records fall within 708(b)(17). |
| Whether the requested documents fall within the plain language of 708(b)(17) | Requester contends the documents are not within the exemption’s scope. | DPW relies on statutory language: correspondence and reports from a noncriminal investigation are exempt. | Yes; documents are within the noncriminal investigation exemption. |
| Whether the notes and internal correspondence were properly waived | Requester did contest these items before the OOR; issue preserved. | Requester waived issues not raised before the OOR regarding notes/internal correspondence. | Waived to the extent not raised before the OOR. |
Key Cases Cited
- Department of Health v. Office of Open Records, 4 A.3d 803 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (defined noncriminal investigation and excused documents as exempt)
- Department of Health, 4 A.3d 810 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (explained meaning of 'investigation' under RTKL)
- Johnson v. Pennsylvania Convention Center Authority, 49 A.3d 920 (Pa.Cmwlth.2012) (analyzes scope of RTKL exemptions for investigations)
- Fort Cherry School District v. Coppola, 37 A.3d 1259 (Pa.Cmwlth.2012) (waiver principle for issues not raised with the OOR)
- Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 990 A.2d 813 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (RTKL purposes to promote access and accountability)