OOR can’t rewrite request; ‘any and all’ unspecific


Pennsylvania State Police v. Office of Open Records
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
No. 1610, C.D. 2009
May 26, 2010

The Commonwealth Court ruled that the Office of Open Records does not have the authority to rewrite a requestor’s Right to Know Law request in considering an appeal. The court also ruled that a request for “any and all records, files… or communications of any kind” was insufficiently specific.

Background

John George submitted a RTKL request to the Pennsylvania State Police seeking “any and all records, files, or manuals, communications of any kind” related to stopping and searching a vehicle and seizing any property in it.

The police denied the request, stating it was insufficiently specific.

George appealed to the Office of Open Records, which agreed that the original request was insufficiently specific, but noted that George had narrowed his request on appeal to seek only the “manual.”

The OOR ruled that new request was specific and ordered the police to provide the manual. The Police appealed to the Commonwealth Court.

Commonwealth Court Decision

The Commonwealth Court started by criticizing the OOR for narrowing George’s request on appeal. As the Court explained, “nowhere in this process has the General Assembly provided that the OOR can refashion the request.” The OOR must consider the request as written.

The court determined that the original request was insufficiently specific because it broadly sought “any and all records, files. .. communications of any kind.”

The court decided, however, that the portion of the request seeking “manuals relating to vehicle stops, searches and seizures is specific and does provide a basis for [the police] to respond.”

The court therefore sent the request back to the police to either provide the manuals or give specific reasons for denying access to them.