Morley v. Central Intelligence Agency
405 U.S. App. D.C. 339
| D.C. Cir. | 2013Background
- Morley requested CIA records about officer George E. Joannides under FOIA; records may illuminate JFK assassination.
- CIA failed to produce documents, prompting Morley to sue and later receive some records.
- Morley moved for attorney’s fees as a substantially prevailing party under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E).
- The District Court applied the circuit’s four-factor standard: public benefit, commercial benefit, requester’s interest, and agency conduct.
- The District Court concluded Morley was not entitled to fees; Morley appealed, and the case was remanded for Davy-based analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether four-factor standard governs FOIA fees | Morley | CIA | Vacated remand pending proper application per Davy |
| Appropriate fee-entitlement rule after remand | Morley favors Newman rule | CIA or Morley favors adherence to current standard | Court contemplates Newman or reasonableness-based rule as alternatives |
Key Cases Cited
- Davy v. CIA, 550 F.3d 1155 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (public benefit of JFK- related disclosures supports fees; guides remand analysis)
- Milner v. Department of the Navy, 131 S. Ct. 1259 (U.S. 2011) (textual FOIA control over historical four-factor approach)
- Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc., 390 U.S. 400 (U.S. 1968) (prevailing plaintiffs entitled to fees unless narrow bad-faith exception)
- Cuneo v. Rumsfeld, 553 F.2d 1360 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (four-factor standard origin in FOIA fee awards)
- Burka v. HHS, 142 F.3d 1286 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (Randolph, J., concurring; critiques of four-factor divisions)