A ruling issued Tuesday by the Indiana Supreme Court reaffirms the importance of public access to government records amid the annual "Sunshine Week" celebration of open government.
In a 5-0 decision, Indiana's highest court clarified when people are entitled to recover attorney's fees from a governmental entity after an initial request for a public record is denied but a court later determines the record should have been provided.
Justice Christopher Goff, writing on behalf of the Supreme Court, said the statutory requirement that a requestor "substantially prevails" in Access to Public Records Act (APRA) litigation to receive attorney's fees does not require the person to obtain all the records he or she was seeking.
Instead, Goff said a litigant substantially prevails when he or she successfully receives a wrongfully withheld public record, even if it's just a portion of the person's total request.
In this case, records show college student Christopher Nardi sought three public records from the Indiana Election Division relating to Indiana's computerized voter registration system, and a court ultimately found he was entitled to a redacted version of one contract.
The Election Division argued the record Nardi ultimately received was "highly redacted and mundane" with little information about the voter registration system. It said Nardi therefore did not substantially prevail on his request and was not entitled to attorney's fees.
Goff disagreed: "Because the division wrongfully withheld portions of the contract, and because Nardi successfully obtained the redacted contract, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that he 'substantially' prevailed under APRA."
At the same time, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Marion Superior Court in Indianapolis to more precisely determine the portion of the $60,795 in incurred attorney's fees Nardi is entitled to recover, rather than just giving him one-third of the total after getting one-third of his request.
"The trial court should award attorney's fees for the time spent on the successful claims. If the trial court determines that the time spent on unsuccessful claims is so closely related to the time spent on successful claims that the time is indivisible, the trial court may also award attorney's fees for the unsuccessful claims," Goff said.
The Supreme Court did not mention Sunshine Week in its 15-page ruling. Though it did recognize Indiana's APRA law as "a powerful tool for ensuring government transparency and accountability" and the role attorney's fees play in that process.
"Because APRA is enforced by the public, its efficacy depends on the public’s ability to challenge an agency's denial of an APRA request. Therefore, APRA provides an attorney's fee award to enable potential plaintiffs to obtain the assistance of competent counsel in vindicating their rights," the court said.
© Copyright 2025, nwitimes.com, Munster, IN