Carmody & Torrance LLP v. DCMA, No. 11-1738, 2014 WL 5684391 (D. Conn. Nov. 4, 2014) (Hall, J.)

Date: 
Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Carmody & Torrance LLP v. DCMA, No. 11-1738, 2014 WL 5684391 (D. Conn. Nov. 4, 2014) (Hall, J.)

Re: Request for certain records concerning Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Disposition: Denying plaintiff's motion for attorney fees

  • Attorney Fees:  The court denies plaintiff's motion for attorney fees.  The court holds that "[plaintiff] has not shown that this is the kind of case in which it is appropriate for the court to exercise its discretion to award a fee."  "Nor, on the merits, is this case the kind in which a fee award is appropriate."  The court explains that it "already made a determination in connection with its Exemption 6 analysis that '[t]he public interest in this case is negligible or nonexistent.'"  Additionally, "[plaintiff] appears to have sought the documents at issue with the only foreseeable benefits being commercial benefits to its client in ongoing litigation."  "On these facts, the first three factors weigh heavily against awarding fees to [plaintiff]."  "And [plaintiff] has not established that the defendants' position had no 'reasonable basis in law.'"
     
Topic: 
Attorney Fees
District Court
Updated February 4, 2015