Walker v. Coffey, No. 19-1067 (3d Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Pennsylvania Attorney General (OAG) charged Walker with forgery and computer crimes. The prosecutor and the lead investigator requested that Penn State produce Walker’s emails from her employee account. At Penn State’s request, they obtained a subpoena. The subpoena was missing information regarding the date, time or place where the testimony or evidence would be produced, or which party was requesting the evidence; the subpoena was unenforceable. The prosecutor offered the subpoena to Penn State’s Assistant General Counsel, who instructed an employee to assist. After the OAG obtained Walker’s emails, the pending criminal charges were dismissed. Walker filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The district court dismissed, citing qualified immunity because Walker did not have a clearly established right to privacy in her work emails. A Third Circuit panel affirmed, reasoning that Penn State produced the emails voluntarily, rather than under coercion resulting from the invalid subpoena and was acting within its legal authority and through counsel.
The Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Walker's amended complaint, alleging violations of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. 2701. The Act is inapplicable because Penn State does not provide electronic communication services to the public. Penn State acted within its rights as Walker’s employer in voluntarily disclosing her work emails; the search of its server to produce Walker’s emails is not prohibited by the Act, regardless of whether its counsel was induced by deceit or cooperative. It is the law of the case that Penn State consented to disclose Walker’s emails.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.