Full Service Law Firm in Mt. Laurel Township, NJ | Capehart Scatchard

Appellate Division Limits Attorneys’ Fees in OPRA Case

December 12, 2017
By Sanmathi (Sanu) Dev, Esq.

By:  Sanmathi (Sanu) Dev, Esq.

On November 27, 2017, the New Jersey Appellate Division in Kennedy v. Montclair Center Corporation Business Improvement District issued an unpublished decision in which it determined that the Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”) does not entitle a plaintiff to attorneys’ fees after the public agency satisfied his document request.

Scott Kennedy made an OPRA request to the Montclair Center Corporation Business Improvement District (“Montclair Center”). Not having received an adequate response, Kennedy filed suit against the Montclair Center alleging that it had no OPRA custodian, had no OPRA request form, and charged excessive copying costs in violation of OPRA. After the lawsuit was filed, the Montclair Center provided the requested documents to Kennedy but maintained its position that it was not a public agency subject to OPRA. In a separate action decided in 2014, the Appellate Division ruled that the Montclair Center was a public agency subject to OPRA.[1]

On remand, the trial court addressed the issue of attorneys’ fees. Kennedy argued that he was a prevailing party entitled to attorneys’ fees for both receiving the documents from the Montclair Center and for obtaining a decision from the Appellate Division that the Montclair Center was a public agency. The trial court disagreed and only awarded Kennedy counsel fees through the receipt of the documents. Kennedy then appealed to the Appellate Division.

The Appellate Division disagreed with Kennedy and affirmed the trial court. In analyzing N.J.S.A. 47:1A-6, the Appellate Division reasoned that the fee-shifting provision of OPRA only applies to successful challenges regarding access to public records. Further, the right to counsel fees only belongs to an OPRA requestor. The Appellate Division explained that once a party receives full access to requested documents, the party is no longer considered a requestor. In short, a party that chooses to pursue additional relief after obtaining access, even if the relief sought is under OPRA, is no longer an OPRA requestor. Thus, when Kennedy pursued his lawsuit against the Montclair Center after it provided him with the documents, he was no longer a requestor entitled to counsel fees.

[1] Kennedy v. Montclair Ctr. Corp. Bus. Improvement Dist., 2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1654 (App. Div. June 24, 2014)

About the Author:

Sanmathi (Sanu) Dev

Chair, Education Practice


Ms. Dev concentrates her practice on the representation of boards of education and school districts in all areas of education law including: labor and employment, special education, Section 504, student discipline, student records, Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act, School Ethics Act, student residency, civil rights, tenure, negotiations, Open Public Records Act, and Open Public Meetings Act.

In connection with these representations, she is an experienced litigator before State and Federal courts, including the Office of Administrative Law. She routinely defends school districts and employers in a variety of claims involving employee discipline and termination, discrimination, harassment, hostile work environment, leaves of absence, Family and Medical Leave Act, New Jersey Family Leave Act, health and safety, whistleblowing, Americans with Disabilities Act, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and First Amendment. Ms. Dev is also an experienced special education litigator and defends school districts in due process hearings from inception through trial. In addition, she litigates employment, labor, and civil rights claims before governmental agencies, including the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. Office for Civil Rights, New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission, and New Jersey Division on Civil Rights.

Ms. Dev also serves as labor counsel and chief negotiator on behalf of employers. She negotiates collective bargaining agreements with union leadership and manages contract negotiations with various collective bargaining units. Ms. Dev defends grievances, disputes, and arbitrations related to collective bargaining agreements.

Ms. Dev founded Capehart Scatchard’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee and served as its Chair from 2017 through February 2024. From 2018-2023, she served as the firm’s Hiring Shareholder. Ms. Dev previously served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Ronald E. Bookbinder, A.J.S.C. in Burlington County.

Share

Top 30 Education Law Blogs

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Capehart Blogs

Categories