PUBLIC LAW EDUC. INSTITUTE v. US DEPT. OF JUSTICE, Civ. A. No. 82-1212.
| Decision Date | 18 January 1983 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 82-1212. |
| Parties | PUBLIC LAW EDUCATION INSTITUTE, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Peter V. Berns, Douglas L. Parker, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Barbara L. Gordon, Leland Ware, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant.
Plaintiff now applies for legal fees and expenses in this Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case. Plaintiff had unsuccessfully sought under the Act any rules or guidelines of the Department of Justice governing the prosecution of individuals evading draft registration required by the Military Selective Service Act, 50 U.S.C. App. § 451 et seq.
Four documents pertinent to plaintiff's FOIA request were located but withheld by the Department as exempt from disclosure under FOIA exemptions 2 and 5. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(2) and (b)(5). Plaintiff filed its complaint on April 30, 1982. On August 17 and 18, 1982, two of the documents at issue were released by a government attorney to rebut a claim of selective prosecution in the case of United States v. Sasway, 686 F.2d 748 (S.D.Cal.). Sometime about September 3, the Department then released the same two documents to plaintiffs inasmuch as they were no longer private. On September 21, 1982, this Court issued an Order denying plaintiff's demand for the other two documents still at issue on the ground they were exempt under 5.
Plaintiff now seeks $7,776.00 in attorneys' fees and $94.20 in expenses on the ground it was a "prevailing party" under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E). Award of fees and expenses is denied.
A party who has received documents under FOIA absent a court order has "substantially prevailed" if the filing of the action could reasonably be regarded as necessary to obtain the information and there is a "causal nexus" between the Court action and the agency's release of the information. Fund for Constitutional Government v. National Archives and Records Service, 656 F.2d 856, 871 (D.C.Cir.1981). Plaintiff has completely failed to show such a nexus. No evidence has been presented to suggest that the documents at issue would have been released if they had not been disclosed by the government to meet issues raised in Sasway. There is, moreover, no proof that the documents were ever withheld improperly.
Even if plaintiff could be said to have substantially prevailed, it would still be only eligible—but not entitled—to pursue some sort of attorneys' fee claim. Fund for Constitutional Government, supra at 870. Plaintiff's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Public Law Educ. Institute v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
...attorney's fees and other litigation costs. PLEI appeals from the denial of that motion. See Public Law Education Institute v. Department of Justice, 556 F.Supp. 476 (D.D.C.1983), (PLEI ). We The facts of this case are simple and undisputed. Appellant PLEI is the publisher of the Military L......
- Ambers v. Heckler, 83-7282