Davy v. Central Intelligence Agency

Summary

The D.C. Circuit held that William Davy was entitled to attorney's fees and costs under the Freedom of Information Act after substantially prevailing in litigation against the CIA. The court concluded that the district court improperly assessed the public-benefit, commercial-interest, and agency-reasonableness factors and remanded for entry of an appropriate fee award.

Holdings

1. A substantially prevailing FOIA litigant's entitlement to attorney's fees is assessed under four factors: the public benefit derived from the case, the commercial benefit to the plaintiff, the nature of the plaintiff's interest in the records, and the reasonableness of the agency's withholding.
2. A plaintiff's intention to publish a book and possible expectation of compensation do not, by themselves, establish a purely commercial interest or bar an award of FOIA attorney's fees; scholarly, journalistic, and public-interest interests may support an award when the plaintiff is seeking to increase public knowledge rather than obtain a private pecuniary advantage.
3. To obtain the benefit of the fourth FOIA fee factor, the agency must demonstrate at least a colorable or reasonable legal basis for failing to disclose the requested material before litigation; the requester need not affirmatively prove that the agency acted unreasonably.
4. Davy was entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs because the public-benefit factor favored him, his interest was scholarly rather than purely commercial, and the agency failed to establish a reasonable basis for its delayed disclosure.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion in applying the four-factor test for awarding attorney's fees and costs to a substantially prevailing FOIA litigant.
2. Whether Davy's scholarly and journalistic interest in records concerning a matter of public importance was improperly treated as a purely commercial interest.
3. Whether the agency demonstrated a colorable or reasonable legal basis for withholding or delaying disclosure of the requested records.
4. Whether Davy was entitled to an award of attorney's fees and costs under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E).

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded