Penncrest School District v. Cagle

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania considers whether school board members’ posts on personal Facebook accounts concerning a school library book display are public records subject to disclosure under Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law. The opinion reviews the statutory definition of “record” and the Commonwealth Court’s framework for determining whether social media activity documents an agency transaction or activity. The Court’s decision is identified as per curiam and authored by Justice Mundy.

Holdings

1. The Right-to-Know Law contains one two-part test applicable to information in any form, including Facebook posts: the information must document a transaction or activity of an agency and must be created, received, or retained pursuant to law or in connection with a transaction, business, or activity of the agency.
2. The Commonwealth Court properly vacated the trial court's order and remanded for further consideration of whether the Board members' Facebook posts were records 'of an agency' under the statutory two-part test.
3. Courts may consider facts particular to social-media communications, including account status, official trappings, post content, audience, official capacity, agency direction, and agency interests, when applying the statutory test; those considerations do not constitute a separate type-specific test.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Right-to-Know Law requires disclosure of school board members' social-media posts on private Facebook accounts when the posts relate to the propriety of a school-library book display.
2. Whether the Commonwealth Court properly remanded the case for further factual consideration of whether the Facebook posts were records 'of an agency' under the Right-to-Know Law.
3. Whether the Right-to-Know Law permits a social-media-specific test beyond the statute's two-part definition of a record.

Disposition

affirmed