Bragg v. Bd. of Supervisors of Rappahannock Cnty.
Citation | 295 Va. 416,813 S.E.2d 331 |
Decision Date | 17 May 2018 |
Docket Number | Record No. 171022 |
Parties | Marian M. BRAGG v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF RAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY, et al. |
Court | Supreme Court of Virginia |
David L. Konick, Washington, for appellant.
Johnathan P. Lienhard (Michael T. Brown, Washington; Arthur L. Goff, County Attorney; Walker Jones, on brief), for appellees.
PRESENT: All the Justices
OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS
In this appeal, we consider whether the Circuit Court of Rappahannock County ("circuit court") erred by dismissing a petition to enforce the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, Code § 2.2-3700, et seq . ("FOIA"), on the basis that the petition failed to comply with Code § 2.2-3713(A) because it was not properly supported by an affidavit showing good cause.
Marian M. Bragg ("Bragg") filed an amended petition against the Rappahannock County Board of Supervisors and its individual members (collectively, the "Board"), alleging that the Board "engaged in a pattern of systematically violating the open meeting requirements of FOIA." The alleged violations stemmed from five closed meetings, which the Board allegedly held for the purpose of discussing, among other things, how it would replace the outgoing County Attorney. Bragg alleged, "on information and belief," that the Board violated FOIA because it improperly discussed "public business matters" during the closed meetings and then, after the meetings, certified that the discussions were exempt from the FOIA open meeting requirements.
In her petition, Bragg asserted that Board member Ronald L. Frazier ("Frazier") acknowledged the Board improperly discussed certain public business matters during the closed meetings. Frazier’s full acknowledgment (the "Frazier Acknowledgement") was notarized and filed as an exhibit to Bragg’s petition. It stated, in relevant part:
In addition to the Frazier Acknowledgment, Bragg also filed an "Affidavit and Verification in Support of Petition for Enforcement of Virginia Freedom of Information Act" (the "Bragg Affidavit"). The Bragg Affidavit was both signed by Bragg and notarized. It stated:
THIS DAY personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary Public, Marian M. Bragg , who, upon being duly sworn by me, stated under oath that all of the allegations in the attached Petition for Enforcement of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act are true and correct, except to the extent therein stated to be on information, and to such extent she believes them to be true.
(emphasis in original).
The Board responded to the petition by filing a demurrer, plea in bar, and motion for summary judgment and dismissal. The circuit court issued a letter opinion on March 15, 2017, in which it granted the Board’s motion to dismiss. The court held that "[t]here [was] a procedural defect in the initiation of the [ ] proceedings" because the petition was not supported "by an affidavit showing good cause," as required by Code § 2.2-3713(A). The circuit court found that the Frazier Acknowledgment was not a proper affidavit because "[t]here [was] no showing that the document was sworn and it contain[ed ] no jurat ."1 The court further held that, even if the Frazier Acknowledgment were in "proper form," the document nevertheless failed to "furnish the [requisite] good cause" because it contradicted Frazier’s prior certifications, pursuant to Code § 2.2-3712(D), that the closed meetings were lawful.
The circuit court also held that the Bragg Affidavit was not an "affidavit showing good cause." The court first found that the Bragg Affidavit failed to comply with Code § 8.01-280 because the oath excluded the allegations in the petition that were "stated to be on information," which constituted the "gravamen" of Bragg’s petition. The court further ruled that the Bragg Affidavit was insufficient because the "petition, and hence the affidavit, fail[ed] to set forth the basis of [Bragg’s] ‘Information,’ " without which the court could not "ascertain that good cause exists."
The circuit court concluded that because of "the infirmities of both affidavits submitted in support of the petition," the requirements of Code § 2.2-3713(A) had not been met. Bragg filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. The circuit court then entered a final order dismissing the petition. Bragg subsequently appealed to this Court, and we awarded an appeal on the following assignments of error:
Where, as here, "no evidence [has been] taken with regard to [a] motion to dismiss[,] we treat the factual allegations in the petition as we do on review of a demurrer." Virginia Marine Res. Comm’n v. Clark , 281 Va. 679, 686, 709 S.E.2d 150, 154 (2011). We accept "the truth of all material facts that are ... expressly alleged, impliedly alleged, and those that may be fairly and justly inferred from the facts alleged." Harris v. Kreutzer , 271 Va. 188, 195-96, 624 S.E.2d 24, 28 (2006). Our inquiry encompasses "not only the substantive allegations of the pleading attacked but also any accompanying exhibit mentioned in the pleading." Flippo v. F & L Land Co. , 241 Va. 15, 17, 400 S.E.2d 156, 156 (1991). We then review the circuit court’s decision to dismiss the petition, and any corresponding issues of statutory interpretation, de novo. Clark , 281 Va. at 686-87, 709 S.E.2d at 154-55 ; Harris , 271 Va. at 195-96, 624 S.E.2d at 28 ; Graves v. Commonwealth , 294 Va. 196, 199, 805 S.E.2d 226, 227 (2017).
Code § 2.2-3713(A) states that "[a]ny person ... denied the rights and privileges conferred by [FOIA] may proceed to enforce such rights and privileges by filing a petition for mandamus or injunction, supported by an affidavit showing good cause ." (emphasis added). The circuit court dismissed Bragg’s petition on the basis that it was not properly supported by an affidavit showing good cause. We disagree.
Pursuant to Code § 8.01-280, "when an affidavit is required in support of any pleading or as a prerequisite to the issuance thereof, it shall be sufficient if the affiant swear that he believes it to be true ." (emphasis added). Here, the Bragg Affidavit swore "that all of the allegations in the [petition] are true and correct, except to the extent therein stated to be on information, and to such extent [Bragg] believes them to be true." Under the circumstances of this case, Bragg’s sworn statement was sufficient to comply with the requirements of Code § 8.01-280 and, by extension, Code § 2.2-3713(A).
The circuit court misread the Bragg Affidavit to the extent it held that the sworn statement failed to comply with Code § 8.01-280. The Bragg Affidavit did not, as the circuit court stated, exclude the allegations in the petition "stated to be on information." Rather, Bragg swore that the allegations based...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
New Age Care, LLC v. Juran
...[appellate courts] treat the factual allegations in the petition as we do on review of a demurrer.’ " Bragg v. Bd. of Supervisors, 295 Va. 416, 423, 813 S.E.2d 331 (2018) (quoting Va. Marine Res. Comm’n v. Clark, 281 Va. 679, 686, 709 S.E.2d 150 (2011), overruled in part on other grounds by......
-
Boyd v. Weisberg
...we review them de novo. New Age Care, LLC v. Juran , 71 Va. App. 407, 421, 837 S.E.2d 64 (2020) (citing Bragg v. Bd. of Supervisors , 295 Va. 416, 423, 813 S.E.2d 331 (2018) ).B. The trial court did not err by denying Boyd's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict because Boyd expre......
-
Aufforth v. Aufforth
...Diagnostic Imaging Assocs., P.C., ––– Va. ––––, ––––, 843 S.E.2d 371 (2020) (alteration in original) (quoting Bragg v. Bd. of Supervisors, 295 Va. 416, 423, 813 S.E.2d 331 (2018) ). Thus, "[w]e accept ‘the truth of all material facts that are ... expressly alleged, impliedly alleged, and th......
-
Green v. Diagnostic Imaging Assocs., P.C.
...has been taken, "we treat the factual allegations in the [complaint] as we do on review of a demurrer." Bragg v. Board of Supervisors , 295 Va. 416, 423, 813 S.E.2d 331 (2018) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, "[w]e accept the truth of all material facts that are......