Crews v. Willows Unified School District
217 Cal. App. 4th 1368
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- Crews, a small-circle newspaper publisher, requested Olmos's emails under PRA; District promised compliance with exemptions.
- District began production, requested narrowing, which Crews declined; format settled on PDFs for ~60,000 emails.
- District spent substantial time reviewing, printing, redacting, and transmitting emails; some attachments omitted inadvertently.
- Crews filed PRA petition before receiving documents, later served after initial production began; 2009 production continued.
- Trial court found District proper in withholding and denied PRA on merits, but held Crews's PRA petition frivolous, awarding fees/d costs to District.
- Court of Appeal reversed the fee/cost award, holding petition not frivolous; affirmed that Crews did not prevail on PRA merits but not frivolous.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Crews's PRA petition frivolous under §6259(d)? | Crews contends petition had merit and intends to investigate possible misuse. | District argues petition was clearly frivolous as no documents were produced. | Not frivolous; petition meritorious, reversal of fee award. |
| Was Crews the prevailing party for fee shifting? | Receipts of documents indicate success; Crews prevailed. | Receipt of documents did not cause disclosure; District argues not prevailing. | Crews not the prevailing party. |
| Did the PRA petition meet the 'clearly frivolous' standard at issue for fees? | PRA sought enforceable rights to inspect withheld materials and formats. | PRA petition lacked merit and was frivolous because it failed to obtain documents. | Not clearly frivolous; not subject to fee shift. |
| Is appellate review appropriate for PRA petitions or solely writ? | Appeal of fee order permissible; merits review of fee issue allowed. | PRA denial review via writ only; fees appeal governed by final judgment. | Fees appeal proper; partial dismissal of second appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Flaherty, 31 Cal.3d 637 (1982) (frivolous-appeal standard with objective/subjective prongs)
- Butt v. City of Richmond, 44 Cal.App.4th 925 (1996) (PRA review via extraordinary writ; fee standards)
- Powers v. City of Richmond, 10 Cal.4th 85 (1995) (PRA decisions reviewable by writ; appellate limits)
- Motorola Communications & Electronics, Inc. v. Department of General Services, 55 Cal.App.4th 1340 (1997) (frivolous PRA action standards; appellate context)
- Los Angeles Times v. Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, 88 Cal.App.4th 1381 (2001) (prevailing party concept under PRA fees)
- Galbiso v. Orosi Public Utility Dist., 167 Cal.App.4th 1063 (2008) (PRA fee outcomes; causation of disclosure)