Ibeagwa v. IRS, No. 14-369, 2015 WL 5076968 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 26, 2015) (Crabb, J.)

Ibeagwa v. IRS, No. 14-369, 2015 WL 5076968 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 26, 2015) (Crabb, J.)                                                                                                       

Re: Request for plaintiff's tax documents 

Disposition: Denying plaintiff's motion for attorney fees and costs

• Attorney Fees:  The court "conclude[s] that plaintiff has shown no benefit to the public provided by his FOIA request and that he was seeking records for a private financial interest, namely, to assist him in a tax dispute with defendant."  "Under these circumstances, [the court] conclude[s] that an award of costs is not appropriate even if plaintiff was entitled to the document."  The court notes that "plaintiff argues that he meets the second part of this definition, 'a voluntary or unilateral change in position by the agency, if the complainant's claim is not insubstantial[,]'" because of "defendant's decision to produce one of his requested documents . . . after he filed this case, but before the court entered judgment."  The court does find that "the term 'insubstantial' in this provision . . . relates to the merit of the plaintiff's claim, not the number or percentage of documents that the agency chose to release voluntarily."  However, the court finds that "even if plaintiff is eligible . . . to receive costs as a prevailing party, this does not mean that plaintiff is entitled to fees or costs."  The court finds that "[t]he fourth factor[,]" "whether the government's withholding of the records had a reasonable basis in the law," "seems to favor plaintiff."  "However, the remaining three factors regarding the public and private interests at stake do not support plaintiff's motion."  "Plaintiff was seeking copies of his own tax documents that were related to defendant's decision to assess a penalty on plaintiff for filing a frivolous return."  "Plaintiff points to no evidence that he had any purpose other than to help himself in a tax dispute with defendant."