From the Charlotte Observer (4/30/09): A state House committee cleared legislation Thursday that would improve the odds that people illegally denied requests for public documents could get their legal fees paid by the offending government agency.
A House judiciary committee unanimously approved the proposal that would curb the discretion of judges whether to award the legal fees in most cases. Although state law allows a judge to award attorney fees to people who successfully fight public records cases, they often choose not to reimburse the winner, leaving them with legal costs that could be thousands of dollars despite proving government officials were wrong.
The measure is seen as a compromise from a similar plan that passed the state Senate last summer but died in the House, said bill sponsor Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Wake.
Some thought increasing the chances that an agency would be forced to pay an opponent’s legal fees would increase access to documents the law says are open.
“I don’t know if it’s enough of a stick,” said Rep. John Blust, R-Guilford. “I think we need to go further. There are some people in government who know the law and yet they stonewall, and stonewall, and stonewall, and they know nothing is going to happen to them.”
Judges will continue to have the discretion to order public officials who violated the law to pay fees out of their own pockets, Ross said.
“If there’s a law that says you have to turn these records over,” Ross said, “then you should have to pay these attorney’s fees.”
Though the measure would increase pressure on bureaucrats, government agencies could avoid payouts if they relied on an appeals court ruling or advice from the state attorney general’s office that was later overturned. A judge would have to determine that a news organization or private citizen was “substantially” right in claiming an agency wrongly withheld data, then decide on which legal fees are “reasonable.”
Lobbyists for two local government associations said their trade groups opposed the measure. They said attorneys working for local governments also should be authoritative sources of legal opinions.
by Emery P. Dalesio, AP Writer