Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


DETROIT FREE PRESS, INC.,  Plaintiff-Appellee, v DEPARTMENT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendant-Appellant.  

UNPUBLISHED May 16, 2006 APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION June 22, 2006 9:00 a.m. No. 264273 Oakland Circuit Court LC No. 05-063422-CZ Official Reported Version

Before: Murray, P.J., and Cavanagh and Saad, JJ. SAAD, J. In this action under Michigan's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq., defendant appeals the trial court's order that awarded plaintiff attorney fees and costs. We reverse. I. Facts and Procedural History The Free Press requested documents from the Attorney General's office that refer to direct wine shipments into Michigan. The Attorney General's office sent a letter to the Free Press that granted its request for any existing, nonexempt documents and denied its request for exempt documents. The Attorney General's office added that it would charge $20 an hour for three hours of labor to search, review, and separate the documents and $0.25 per page to copy approximately 541 pages, plus mailing costs. The letter further stated that the Attorney General's office would mail the nonexempt documents to the Free Press as soon as it received a deposit to partially cover the above costs. The Free Press sent what it referred to as an appeal to the Attorney General and (1) asked for reconsideration of the copy fees, (2) argued that labor fees are unnecessary because the request was not unduly burdensome, and (3) asked the Attorney General to clarify the decision to exempt certain documents from disclosure. The Attorney General declined to alter the decision, and the Free Press filed this action in Oakland Circuit Court. Specifically, the Free Press alleged that the Attorney General violated FOIA by constructively denying its request through the imposition of labor charges and excessive copying charges. The Free Press's complaint did not assert a claim with regard to the Attorney General's partial denial of its FOIA request on the ground that the documents are exempt from disclosure.

-1-


The trial court granted summary disposition to the Free Press on the Attorney General's labor charge because it ruled that, under MCL 15.234(3), a government agency may not charge a labor fee unless the failure to do so would result in an unreasonably high cost to the agency. According to the trial court, the Attorney General failed to show that not charging the $60 labor fee would result in unreasonably high labor costs to the Attorney General's office. However, the trial court denied the Free Press's motion for summary disposition on the copy fees because the Attorney General established that the per-page charge was within the appropriate parameters of FOIA. The Attorney General chose not to appeal the trial court's ruling on the labor charge. Thereafter, the Free Press filed a motion for attorney fees and costs that totaled $33,830.60. The trial court ruled that the Free Press prevailed in part under MCL 15.240(6), and it awarded the paper $15,989.75 in fees and costs. II. Analysis We hold that the trial court erred when it awarded attorney fees and costs to the Free Press. Attorney fees are available under

Download DETROIT FREE PRESS INC V DEPT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL.pdf

Michigan Law