106 A.3d 1145
Me.2014Background
- Michael Doyle submitted a FOAA request for the July–September 2013 cellular telephone bills of the Falmouth School Department’s former Superintendent (school-issued phones paid by the School Department; personal use permitted).
- The former Superintendent provided copies with redactions she claimed were nonpublic/confidential; the Town produced those redacted records to Doyle.
- Doyle appealed to Superior Court seeking unredacted records; the court ordered in camera review of unredacted bills and supporting materials while providing Doyle copies with numbers redacted.
- Superior Court upheld redactions and entered judgment for the Town and School Department; Doyle appealed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.
- The Superior Court’s rulings: (1) employee work-issued cellular numbers qualify as exempt “personal contact information”; (2) purely personal calls are not public records; (3) parents’/students’ telephone numbers are confidential under FERPA and Maine law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether work-issued cellular numbers are "personal contact information" exempt from FOAA | Doyle: Numbers are agency records and must be disclosed | Town/School: Work-issued numbers are personal contact info protected by §402(3)(O) | Court: Exempt — work-issued numbers fall within "personal cellular telephone number" protection |
| Whether calls made on work-issued phones are public records | Doyle: All calls on agency phones relate to public business and are disclosable | Town/School: Personal calls unrelated to government business are not public records | Court: Held personal calls unrelated to government business may be redacted |
| Whether parents’/students’ telephone numbers must be disclosed | Doyle: Phone records are public unless specifically exempt | Town/School: FERPA and Maine law make student/parent identifiers confidential | Court: Held telephone numbers of students/parents are confidential under FERPA and properly redacted |
| Whether Doyle should have seen unredacted records during in camera review | Doyle: He should have access to review unredacted material submitted in camera | Town/School: Protection of exempt information justified limited access | Court: Denial of access appropriate because exempt portions properly protected |
Key Cases Cited
- MaineToday Media, Inc. v. State, 82 A.3d 104 (2013) (agency bears burden to justify FOAA denial)
- Cyr v. Madawaska Sch. Dept., 916 A.2d 967 (2007) (permissible redaction of nonpublic information)
- Wiggins v. McDevitt, 473 A.2d 420 (Me. 1984) (broad definition of public records subject to specific exceptions)
- Moffett v. City of Portland, 400 A.2d 340 (Me. 1979) (FOAA exceptions strictly construed but privacy considerations relevant)
- Hickson v. Vescom Corp., 87 A.3d 704 (2014) (statutory interpretation begins with plain meaning)
- In re Wage Payment Litig., 759 A.2d 217 (2000) (use legislative history when plain text is ambiguous)
Judgment affirmed.