It seems that the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records is tired of being dragged into the fight over Right to Know requests in Centre County.
In court documents filed by the ORR in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the state agency asks the court to dismiss an action filed by Centre County over the increasingly complicated Right to Know dispute between the county, two judges and District Attorney Stacy Parks Miller.
The issue stems from two separate lawsuits filed against the county filed by Parks Miller, Centre County Common Pleas Judge Jonathan Grine and Magisterial Judge Kelley Gillette-Walker for releasing some of their phone records in response to Right to Know requests. A court order in those lawsuits prevents the county from responding to similar requests, but an opinion from the OOR has determined that the county should in fact release similar records.
Although the Centre County has asked the Commonwealth Court to make sense of these seemingly contradictory determinations, the OOR says the Commonwealth Court is the wrong venue in which to settle the matter.
“The Petitioner County is required to appeal…to the Centre County Court of Common Pleas, prior to brining any further appeal to this Honorable Court,” the ORR argues. “The Petitioner County appealed…to the CentreCounty Court of Common Pleas, and that action is still pending.”
Outside of the pending appeal in the lower court, the OOR also argues that Centre County has not established that it will suffer “a direct, immediate and substantial injury” without the Commonwealth Court’s intervention. Because the county has a separate pending appeal of the judge’s order preventing the release of judicial records, the OOR says the county is in no danger of any harm until that appeal is decided.
In addition for asking the Commonwealth Court action to be dismissed, the OOR has also asked a judge to press pause on the case by issuing a stay. The OOR argues that, since a similar action is underway in the county courts, it doesn’t make sense to have a similar action in the higher court.
“It is respectfully suggested that the interests of judicial economy will be best served by staying the instant matter pending the disposition of the foregoing matters pending before the Centre County Court of Common Pleas and this Honorable Court,” the OOR writes.
