Fiscella v. Arha

Alexandria County Circuit Court

Fiscella v. Arha

50 Va. Cir. 102, 1999 Va. Cir. LEXIS 392

Alexandria County Circuit Court·Decided June 2, 1999·No. Case No. CH9881349·Published

Opinion

By Judge Alfred d. Swersky

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s application for attorney’s fees pursuant to § 2.1-340.1 et seq. for his request for information from Defendant under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (VFQIA).

Fiscella filed a VFOIA request in his own name, and Defendant responded to a client of Fiscella, wrongfully assuming that his request was on its behalf. The parties agree that Defendant has now complied with the request. Attorney’s fees are sought for the filing of this suit. The request will be denied.

In addition to the fact that Petitioner was acting pro se and incurred no “attorney’s fees,” the violation by Defendant was insubstantial and does not justify an award of attorney’s fees. These factors would make an award of fees unjust under § 2.1-346. See, Nageotte v. King George County, 223 Va. 259 (1982); Hale v. Washington County Sch. Bd., 241 Va. 76 (1991).

Mr. Fiscella will be awarded his actual out-of-pocket costs for filing fees, service of process, and related costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By Judge Alfred d. Swersky

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s application for attorney’s fees pursuant to § 2.1-340.1 et seq. for his request for information from Defendant under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (VFQIA).

Fiscella filed a VFOIA request in his own name, and Defendant responded to a client of Fiscella, wrongfully assuming that his request was on its behalf. The parties agree that Defendant has now complied with the request. Attorney’s fees are sought for the filing of this suit. The request will be denied.

In addition to the fact that Petitioner was acting pro se and incurred no “attorney’s fees,” the violation by Defendant was insubstantial and does not justify an award of attorney’s fees. These factors would make an award of fees unjust under § 2.1-346. See, Nageotte v. King George County, 223 Va. 259 (1982); Hale v. Washington County Sch. Bd., 241 Va. 76 (1991).

Mr. Fiscella will be awarded his actual out-of-pocket costs for filing fees, service of process, and related costs.

Fiscella v. Arha, 50 Va. Cir. 102, 1999 Va. Cir. LEXIS 392 (Va. Super. Ct. 1999).

Pincite

50 Va. Cir. 102 (Fiscella v. Arha) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related