Other
-
Rivera v. Long (Virginia Supreme Court)
Where the Social Security numbers are redacted from voter registration application records, the documents will no longer be exempt from inspection.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-12-07
If a public body denies a request for public records in whole or part, it must send the requester a written response citing the law that allows the records to be withheld. The release of certain Department of Social Services records pertaining to child support enforcement matters is prohibited by law under Title 63.2 of…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-03-07
An electronic mail message header showing the time and date when the message was received by a public body may not be withheld as documentation or other information that describes the design, function, operation or access control features of any security system under subdivision 3 of § 2.2-3705.2.
-
Rivera v. Long (Norfolk Circuit Court) (on costs and attorneys’ fees)
Judge rules on cost prevailing plaintiff should pay for copies of general registrar’s records, as well as on attorneys’ fees for the plaintiff’s attorney.
-
White Dog Publishing v. Culpeper Board of Supervisors
In considering certain newspaper publishers’ application for a writ of mandamus, the circuit court erred in finding that a county board of supervisors did not violate the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by going into a closed session at a particular meeting and erred in failing to award reasonable costs and attorney’s fees under…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-06-06
Opining whether a FOIA provision violates substantive due process under the federal Constitution is beyond the authority of the FOIA Council.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-03-06
It is beyond the scope of the FOI Advisory Council’s authority to interpret the rules of either house of the General Assembly. There is no joint conference of the General Assembly after adjournment sine die.
-
Media General Operations Inc. v. Buchanan (4th Cir. on access to courts)
Several media companies joined forces to request a judicial order that would unseal affidavits supporting search warrants related to U.S. antiterrorist efforts. They also wanted the district court to maintain a public docket of search warrant proceedings. The 4th Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that denied those requests. Although the press has a qualified…
-
Jordan v. Kollman (Virginia Supreme Court on libel)
Jordan, a resident of Colonial Heights, published advertisements criticizing the mayor for allowing low-income housing to be built in the city. In fact, the mayor had opposed the construction of the housing, and he sued for defamation. But the Court ruled that the mayor was a ‘public official’ required to show ‘actual malice’ in the…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-26-04
The Virginia Board of Bar examiners has discretion under §54.1-108 to withhold the passing score an individual made on the bar exam, even when it is the subject individual making the request. The Virginia Board of Bar Examiners can elect to withhold aggregate data on bar exam results under the board’s broad grant of authority…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-22-04
It is the policy of the FOIAC not to issue advisory opinions on matters in pending litigation, or on matters that have already been decided by a judge of competent jurisdiction. Whether or not an entity is a public body is to be measured at the time a request for records is made. Even if…
-
Virginia Department of State Police v. Washington Post (4th Cir. on access to courts)
The Virginia police objected unsuccessfully to the unsealing of records related to Earl Washington, Jr., who was wrongly sentenced to death for rape and murder. After DNA evidence led to a pardon for Washington, media organizations asked for police documents relating to the initial investigation, which were subpoenaed in a civil suit Washington brought after…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-21-04
FOI Advisory Council lacks statutory authority to determine whether the Americans with Disabilities Act would allow sensory or physically disabled members of local public bodies to meet via electronic means when FOIA squarely prohibits it.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-19-04
E-mail exchanges between members of an electoral board do not violate FOIA’s meeting provisions, though to the extent those e-mails relate to the transaction of public business, they are public records subject to disclosure. Centralized repository for e-mail messages between public body memers is a good idea. Before engaging in e-mail discussion of substantive matters,…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-18-04
registrar clerk erred by requiring requester to put verbal FOIA request in writing. Freedom of Information Advisory Council has no authority to investigate or enforce possible FOIA violations. Dispute over whether a record exists is a fact issue for a court to resolve.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-16-04
It appears that the intent of the law would indicate that if records do not exist, this should be stated in writing to the requester. once a deposit is requested from the public body, a requester does not have the right to demand that certain records that are believed to be easily accessible be provided…
-
Zaleski v. Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND Allan D. Zaleski, Plaintiff v. Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission, Defendant CH03-1603-3 OPINION AND ORDER The parties appeared for argument on the demurrer to the bill of complaint. Proceeding under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, plaintiff seeks disclosure of an advisory opinion given by Counsel…
-
Media General Operations v. City Council of the City of Richmond
City council meeting to discuss performance of city manager improperly strayed into discussion of city’s soaring crime rate. No authority for closing a proceeding to present closing arguments in a case challenging the propriety of a closed meeting.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-07-04
The records exemption at subdivision A 78 of § 2.2-3705 only exempts personal information provided to a public body for purposes of receiving e-mail from a public body; it does not apply to personal information provided to an individual elected official who chooses to send out e-mails or updates to constituents.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-06-04
Town-created strategic planning committee is a public body. The Onancock Business and Civic Organization is not a public body because, exclusive of public grant funding, it receives only 36% of its funding from governmental monies. FOI Advisory Council cannot advise on what is or should be meaningful citizen participation. Nothing in FOIA prohibits receivers of…
-
Beck v. Shelton
FOIA does not apply to members-elect. Exchange of multiple e-mails over a several-hour period not an illegal electronic meeting. Neighborhood meeting no FOIA violation.
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-02-04
Public body must follow FOIA’s notice provision, even if planning to go into a closed meeting immediately; closed meeting can only take place within the context of an open meeting. Draft proposal between a city and a county over acquisition of water may be withheld under the exemption for contract negotations, if disclosure would jeopardize…
-
FOI Advisory Council Opinion AO-22-03
FOIA does not prohibit public bodies from regulating public comment period during open meetings. A public comment period rule prohibiting speakers from asking questions of the public body and its staff does not violate FOIA’s allowance for records requests to be made verbally. FOIAC cannot render opinions regarding possible federal constitutional violations.
-
U.S. v. Moussaoui (4th Cir. on access to court records)
Here, a group of media companies asked to intervene in the trial of accused terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui. They sought access to portions of the record and of the pleadings and motions made by the government. The 4th Circuit agreed with their contention that sealing off all such records was unnecessarily restrictive, and agreed to provide…
-
Rossignol v. Voorhaar (4th Cir. on censorship)
A newspaper publisher brought a 1983 suit for violation of its First Amendment rights, after county sheriff deputies worried about the paper’s Election Day editorials conspired to buy out the paper’s entire stock from vendors across the county. The district court gave summary judgment for the deputies, saying they acted privately and not under color…