Legal Opinion
Donahue v. Thomas
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 20, 1992No. 91-CV-334PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SULLIVAN, Associate Judge:
Appellant raises an issue of first impression, namely, whether a pro se non-attorney plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and other costs of litigation pursuant to the District of Columbia Freedom of Information Act (“D.C.-FOIA”). D.C.Code §§ 1-1521-1529 (1992). 1 We hold that as a matter of law a pro se non-attorney plaintiff, although statutorily eligible for an award of costs, cannot recover attorney’s fees pursuant to D.C.-FOIA.
Regrettably, neither the text of D.C.-FOIA, nor its legislative history, 2 provides adequate guidance as to…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Yates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Kay v. EhrlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Gilbert A. Cuneo v. Donald H. RumsfeldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Norman Industrial Development Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- McReady v. Department of Consumer & Regulatory AffairsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Upson v. WallaceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Emerson v. Town of StratfordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
- Lenkin Co. Management v. District of Columbia Rental Housing CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.