CCP Lackawanna and the Tax Collector

August 2010Alerts

A reader asked me in the context of my prior article dealing with CCP Lackawanna v. OOR (see item from August 17) how that case might apply to the tax records in the hands of the Tax Collector. It doesn't. In fact, the CCP Lackawanna case is the exact opposite of that.

For the benefit of those unaware of this, the OOR has taken the position that where a Tax Collector performs his statutory duty on behalf of an agency, it remains the agency's duty to get his records and turn them over upon request. This despite the statute making the Tax Collector exempt from the RTKL. The OOR's position was successfully challenged in the Montgomery County CCP with the case on appeal to the

Commonwealth Court. (I wrote about this situation in an alert to the firm's clients back in January 2010 before Mr. Honaman took his appeal on behalf of Signature Solutions. CW Ct. argument is now scheduled for September 2010, so stay tuned).

Thus, where the CCP Lackawanna case involved judicial records (private non-RTKL records) in the hands of an agency with a duties under the RTKL, the Tax Collector situation involves a request for arguably public records sent to an agency that does not have the records to turn over.

So I would not recommend relying upon the CCP Lackawanna case for issues dealing with the Tax Collector's records. For that issue, we will have to await the ruling of the courts. That being said, were I deciding the case, I would side with Judge Moore (of Montgomery County CCP) and point out that the records the Tax Collector is required to turn over to a taxing agency is limited both in extent and timing and only make an agency turn over what it has actually received.

If you have any questions about this Alert, please contact Kyle Berman or any member of Fox Rothschild’s Education Law Group.