Indiana Supreme Court Upholds Private Party Fees in APRA Case
Indiana Supreme Court Upholds Private Party Fees in APRA Case
In July 2012, the Supreme Court of Indiana affirmed the trial court’s apportionment of attorney’s fees awarded to the plaintiff, International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (Union). The fees were assessed jointly and severally against the defendants, Metropolitan School District of Warren Township (Township), and ShepCo Commercial Finishes. The controversy arose out of an access to public records act (APRA) request submitted by Union for payroll records created by ShepCo, a private subcontractor, for Township, and held by Township. The trial court found for Union and ordered Township to disclose the records and awarded $22,659 in attorney’s fees to Union, to be paid by Township and ShepCo. ShepCo appealed and the court of appeals ruled that ShepCo was exempt from attorney’s fees liability and that Township should shoulder the financial burden alone.
The Indiana Supreme Court accepted transfer and reviewed the case de novo. The Court, in its analysis, interpreted not only the wording of the APRA statute and the legislative intent, but also expounded on the reasoning and necessity of the clause that allowed for liability of attorney’s fees on an intervening private party in an APRA issue.
Appellant ShepCo urged the supreme court to adopt the logic of the court of appeals, that ShepCo’s status as an intervenor set them apart from private party defendants in similar cases and thus shielded them from the attorney fees liability referenced in APRA. Union contended that ShepCo’s action in this case was indistinguishable from other private party defendants in court precedent.
The court agreed with Union, reasoning that “shield[ing] private entities from liability for attorney’s fees would thwart, rather than further, the public policy underlying the APRA.” Since the Indiana legislature mandated that the APRA must be “’liberally construed to implement’ the policy of full access to public records and transparency of governmental affairs,” the court noted that the statue clearly contemplated the involvement of private parties in APRA litigation. Protecting private entities from liability as to attorney’s fees opens the door for private parties asserting non-meritorious defenses to drive up litigation costs and avoid disclosure.
The court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in the apportionment of attorney’s fees and remanded the case to the trial court to determine what additional attorney’s fees should be assessed as a result of the instant litigation.
See: Shepherd Props. Co. v. Int'l Union of Painters & Allied Trades, 972 N.E.2d 845 (Ind. 2012), Case No: 49504-1112-PL-697 July 31, 2012.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Shepherd Props. Co. v. Int'l Union of Painters & Allied Trades
| Year | 2012 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 972 N.E.2d 845 (Ind. 2012) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |