Granted: Unredacted solicitor's invoices
March 03, 2009 Filed in: Granted
| Pottstown
SD |
Solicitor
invoices | Privilege
| Agency
non-compliance
Granted: A request made to the
Pottstown School District for all invoices from
the district's solicitor since Dec. 1, 2003.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Granted: A request made to the Pottstown School District for all invoices from the district's solicitor since Dec. 1, 2003. The district had provided the requester with 744 pages of invoices, but had redacted all descriptions of the work performed, without explanation.
The Office of Open Records noted that by providing redacted records, the district partially denied the request, and that the district was required to provide an explanation for the redaction and to legally defend it. The district also did not provide the requester with contact information for the open records officer or with the procedure to appeal, which are also required by the open records law.
In its response to the inquiry by the OOR, the district claimed all matters of general legal representation are covered by the attorney-client privilege, and thus are exempt from disclosure.
In its determination, the Office of Open Records noted the request was for all legal invoices, not just those representing litigation services, and that the district redacted all the invoices without explanation. It stated that the district did not provide enough information to discern if redaction was appropriate, that is also failed to comply with the requirements of the open records law, and that it failed to meet the burden of proving that its invoices are exempt from disclosure.
The district was ordered to provide copies of the legal invoices to the requester without redaction, with the exception of any information related to an individual child or employee, in accordance with the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Right to Know Law exemption related to employees, and with the exception of any other information prohibited from disclosure by other federal or state law.
Hylton vs. Pottstown School District -- AP 2009-0043
Granted: A request made to the Pottstown School District for all invoices from the district's solicitor since Dec. 1, 2003. The district had provided the requester with 744 pages of invoices, but had redacted all descriptions of the work performed, without explanation.
The Office of Open Records noted that by providing redacted records, the district partially denied the request, and that the district was required to provide an explanation for the redaction and to legally defend it. The district also did not provide the requester with contact information for the open records officer or with the procedure to appeal, which are also required by the open records law.
In its response to the inquiry by the OOR, the district claimed all matters of general legal representation are covered by the attorney-client privilege, and thus are exempt from disclosure.
In its determination, the Office of Open Records noted the request was for all legal invoices, not just those representing litigation services, and that the district redacted all the invoices without explanation. It stated that the district did not provide enough information to discern if redaction was appropriate, that is also failed to comply with the requirements of the open records law, and that it failed to meet the burden of proving that its invoices are exempt from disclosure.
The district was ordered to provide copies of the legal invoices to the requester without redaction, with the exception of any information related to an individual child or employee, in accordance with the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Right to Know Law exemption related to employees, and with the exception of any other information prohibited from disclosure by other federal or state law.
Hylton vs. Pottstown School District -- AP 2009-0043