Courts
-
Maddox v. City of Chesapeake (COA-unpublished)
The Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, rules the Chesapeake did not have to give a former police lieutenant a redacted copy of a duty schedule for the city’s 911 call center because his knowledge of the scheduling system would allow him to figure out who was working and thus who made a complaint…
-
Horner v. Office of Attorney General (COA-unpublished)
The Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, ruled that the working papers exemption extends to the entire office of the attorney general, not just to the AG as an official.
-
Breaking Through Media v. Seaton (COA-unpublished)
In an unpublished opinion, the Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s denial of an injunction as a remedy for Augusta County’s failure to respond to FOIA request within the required deadline. The court also said the plaintiff didn’t substantially prevail on the “main object” of their petition, which was to force disclosure of records…
-
Virginia State Conference NAACP v. Governor Glenn Youngkin (COA-unpublished)
The Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, ruled that because the trial court did not make a ruling on attorney fees, the underlying case was not yet over. The trial court ruled the governor could withhold records on voting rights restoration under the working papers exemption.
-
Commonwealth v. Sawyer (COA)
The Court of Appeals of Virginia ruled April 29, 2025, that the trial court was right to find that the plaintiff (Sawyer) had stated an adequate claim under FOIA, but was wrong to order all of the records to be released without looking over any of them to see if the working papers exemption applied.…
-
City of Roanoke v. Schwaner (Roanoke Circuit Court)
A Roanoke Circuit Court judge issued a declaratory judgment confirming that neither the City of Roanoke’s internal policies nor the contract it had with Flock Group, Inc., over the use of Flock’s license plate reader cameras could override the city’s duty to comply with a FOIA request for Flock data.
-
Blackstock v. Virginia Department of Transportation (COA)
The Court of Appeals for Virginia rules that VDOT could assert an exemption for the first time on appeal because the exemption contained a prohibition against release of specific information; it was an ‘other law’ that prohibited release. The exemption at issue is 2.2-3705.3(7): ““Investigative notes, correspondence and information furnished in confidence, and records otherwise…
-
Morgan v. Board of Supervisors of Hanover County (COA)
Among many issues around the county’s approval of a Wegman’s warehouse, the Court of Appeals affirms the trial court finding that the COVID restrictions put in place for the public hearing did not violate FOIA.
-
Juarez v. Commonwealth’s Attorney for Prince William County (circuit court)
Circuit Court Judge Angela Horan ruled the Prince William County Commonwealth’s Attorney violated FOIA multiple times over an 18-month period by failing to respond, not providing all the records requested, and not matching redactions with an exemption. The judge ordered the CA to pay the petitioner $22,500 in attorney fees.
-
Minium v. Hines (COA)
The Court of Appeals of Virginia ruled against the Hanover sheriff, who said he could redact the names of 220 police officers from a spreadsheet of salary information because those officers might one day be used in undercover operations. “Hypothetical future undercover operations, by their very nature as ‘hypothetical,’ are not yet a reality and…
-
Clay v. City of Richmond (demurrer)
A Richmond Circuit Court judge rejects the City of Richmond’s attempt to have the city’s former FOIA officer’s, Connie Clay, whistleblower lawsuit thrown out.
-
NPR v. Virginia Department of Corrections (COA-unpublished)
In an unpublished opinion, the Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that four tapes made of executions between 1987 and 1990 are records “of persons imprisoned” that can be withheld under 2.2-3706(B)(4).
-
Courthouse News Service v. Smith
4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says the limit the Virginia court system places on access to civil case materials online — which is limited to attorneys only — is a reasonable time, place and manner restriction.
-
Town of South Hill v. Hawkins (COA)
The Court of Appeals affirms the trial court’s decisions requiring several documents to be released with minimal redactions. They do not constitute personnel information as defined by the Virginia Supreme Court (the first time this case went through the appeals process) because disclosure would not be an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy to a reasonable…
-
Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads v. Raja (circuit court)
The chief judge of the Norfolk Circuit Court ruled the Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads (HRT) did not have the duty to search employees’ personal phones, nor did it have the authority to compel the employees to turn their phones over, in response to a FOIA request for text messages about public business that might…
-
Minium v. Chesterfield County (circuit court)
A Chesterfield County Circuit Court ruled that the Chesterfield Police Department can redact names of many of its officers from a spreadsheet of salary information because those officers can be used for undercover operations at any time.
-
Keil v. O’Sullivan (Court of Appeals)
Former police officer is not entitled to investigative records about an incident involving the officer because he is not a “data subject” under the Government Data Collection & Dessimination Practices Act. Also some FOIA issues.
-
Citizens for Fauquier County v. Warrenton (COA)
The Court of Appeals rules that a city/town invoking the working papers and correspondence exemption (in particular, the correspondence part), cannot invoke it on behalf of both the city/town mayor AND the city/town manager (or other executive officer). The city/town must choose between the two. The court also says that the method by which Warrenton…
-
City of Norfolk v. Zoghi (COA)
The Court of Appeals of Virginia rules — in an unpublished opinion — that the City of Norfolk cannot withhold records related to a juvenile crime victim under §16.1-301, which, the court says, only applies to the withholding of records related to juvenile defendants.
-
Blackstock v. VDOT (circuit court)
A report prepared by the VDOT Assurance and Compliance Office looking into allegations of an improper hiring decision should not have been redacted under the personnel exemption, but it could be withheld under an exemption for internal investigations, 2.2-3705.3(7).
Opinions -
Lee BHM v. School Board of the City of Richmond (Circuit Ct.)
Circuit Court judge Reilly Marchant rules a report prepared by a law firm for the school board was not protected by attorney-client privilege in its entirety. Specific parts that actually reflect legal advice may be redacted, but otherwise, the report is a fact-finding endeavor, not legal advice, even if legal consequences could follow from the…
-
Minium v. Hines (Hanover Circuit Court)
Hanover Circuit Court says the names of most officers in the Hanover Sheriff’s office can be kept off of a spreadsheet of department salaries because some of those officers might one day work undercover.
-
Hawkins v. South Hill (remand)
Mecklenburg Circuit Court judge orders release of redacted records previously withheld under the personnel records exemption.
-
Dooley v. Gloucester School Board
Gloucester County General District Court: Meeting to discuss disciplining a fellow board meet was improper based on the notice given; recording made in the meeting must be released.
-
Gloss v. Wheeler (Supreme Court)
Community forum meeting that 5 members of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors attended and discussed police response to the George Floyd protests should have been open to the public under FOIA because it discussed “public business.” The majority and dissenting opinions discuss the contours of “public business.”