[co-author: Victoria Boyko]
In Bertoli v. City of Sebastopol, 2015 DJDAR 779, the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District decided a case involving a fee request under the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”).
The plaintiff was rendered disabled after she was hit by a car while crossing the street in the City of Sebastopol. Her attorney, David Rouda, requested various documents, including emails and other electronically stored information (“ESI”) from the City pursuant to the California Public Records Act. The City refused to comply. The City claimed the request was overly broad and burdensome. The plaintiff petitioned for writ of mandate seeking to enforce the document request under the CPRA. The trial court concluded that the request was “clearly frivolous” and it awarded the City its attorney fees and costs.
The First Appellate District reversed the award of attorney fees. The court noted that the CPRA allows access to public records, including ESIs, related to the state or local agency’s business. However, the agency is only limited to disclose public records that can be located with reasonable effort. An award for attorney fees and costs related to a CPRA claim is proper only where the CPRA request was prosecuted to harass or delay. The court noted that the plaintiff’s CPRA request was not “clearly frivolous.” Because the plaintiff’s position was not entirely baseless, the appellate court overturned the decision.
