Tribune-Review Publishing Co. v. Westmoreland County Housing Authority, 574 Pa. 661

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that a confidential settlement agreement resolving a federal civil rights action against a public housing authority was a public record subject to disclosure under the Pennsylvania Right-to-Know Act. The court concluded that the insurer acted as the housing authority’s agent, that the authority had control over the agreement despite lacking physical possession, and that the confidentiality clause was unenforceable insofar as it conflicted with the Act. The court affirmed the Commonwealth Court’s order requiring disclosure.

Holdings

1. A settlement agreement negotiated on behalf of a public agency by its insurer-agent to resolve litigation arising from the agency's official conduct is a public record under the former Right-to-Know Act.
2. A public agency's lack of physical possession of a record does not defeat its disclosure obligation when the record is subject to the agency's control.
3. An insurer that undertakes to defend and resolve litigation for a public agency acts as the agency's agent for purposes of determining whether the resulting settlement document is a public record.
4. A confidentiality clause in a public-agency settlement agreement is unenforceable to the extent it conflicts with the Right-to-Know Act and public policy favoring disclosure of public records.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a settlement agreement negotiated by a public agency's insurer in resolving a federal civil-rights action involving the agency is a public record under Pennsylvania's former Right-to-Know Act.
2. Whether the agreement remains subject to disclosure when the public agency does not physically possess or sign it.
3. Whether a confidentiality provision in the settlement agreement prevents disclosure under the Right-to-Know Act.
4. Whether the insurer's relationship with the Housing Authority was materially different from the independent bookstore relationship considered in Dynamic Student Services v. State System of Higher Education.

Disposition

affirmed