Montgomery County v. Iverson
2012 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 244
Pa. Commw. Ct.2012Background
- Iverson (Requestor) submitted a December 3, 2010 RTKL request to Montgomery County for electronic copies of all emails to/from montcopa.org and three other domains containing keywords in the subject or body.
- The request had no timeframe and did not identify specific individuals, email addresses, or departments.
- The County denied the request on January 10, 2011 for lack of specificity under §703, citing missing time period, recipients, and subject matter.
- The Open Records Office issued a Final Determination that the request was sufficiently specific; the County appealed to the trial court.
- At a hearing, county witnesses testified that fulfilling the request would require new hardware, weeks to search, and extensive manual review, making the request impracticable; the trial court held the request overly broad.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding the request was not sufficiently specific under §703 and thus upholding the trial court’s reversal of the OOR determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Iverson's request sufficiently specific under RTKL §703? | Iverson's request identifies domains and keywords to scope the search. | County argued the request lacked a timeframe, recipients, and subject matter to enable precise identification of records. | No; the request is too broad and not sufficiently specific. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pennsylvania State Police v. Office of Open Records, 995 A.2d 515 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (contextual specificity required to identify records; overbroad phrases insufficient)
- Mollick v. Township of Worcester, 32 A.3d 859 (Pa.Cmwlth.2011) (overbroad timing/subject scope burdens agency)
- Easton Area School District v. Baxter, 35 A.3d 1259 (Pa.Cmwlth.2012) (narrow timeframe can render a request sufficiently specific)