Toensing v. Attorney Gen. of Vt.
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtCarroll, J.
*181¶ 1. In this appeal, we address whether plaintiff, a substantially prevailing self-represented litigant in a case brought under the Vermont Access to Public Records Act (PRA), is entitled to attorney's fees because he is an attorney. The civil division of the superior court denied plaintiff's request for attorney's fees. On appeal, plaintiff argues that he is entitled to attorney's fees based on the plain language of the relevant PRA provision, the purpose of the Act, and the public policy underlying the Act. We join the vast majority of jurisdictions construing similar acts in concluding…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Kay v. EhrlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Jackson v. State Office of Administrative HearingsTexas Supreme Court · 2011
- Burka v. United States Department of Health & Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Andrew Pickholtz v. Rainbow Technologies, Inc. And Software Security, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Jack Massengale v. Michael RayCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2001
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Meghan Forrett v. Orion StoneSupreme Court of Vermont · 2021
- State v. Clayton TurnerSupreme Court of Vermont · 2021
- Ben Motal v. City of Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2025