When can attorney fees be recovered in GRAMA proceedings? Murray City v. Maese Explained

In Murray City v. Maese, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed important timing requirements for seeking attorney fees and costs under the Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA). The case provides crucial guidance for practitioners handling GRAMA judicial review proceedings.

S. Steven Maese requested police discipline reports from Murray City under GRAMA. After the Utah State Records Committee ordered the city to disclose officer names but not witness names, Murray City sought judicial review in district court. The district court affirmed the Committee’s order but dismissed Maese’s counterclaim for attorney fees and costs as untimely.

The Court of Appeals found most issues moot because Maese had already received the records he sought. However, the court addressed the attorney fees issue, clarifying that under GRAMA, attorney fees and costs are only available “in connection with appeals to district courts” rather than during administrative proceedings before the Records Committee.

Critically, the court ruled that the district court erred in dismissing Maese’s fees claim as untimely. Under Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Maese had twenty days to file a responsive pleading after being served with the city’s petition for judicial review. Since he filed his response within this timeframe and included his fees claim, the court held this satisfied GRAMA’s timing requirements.

The decision establishes that parties seeking fees and costs under GRAMA must raise these claims during the judicial review phase, not during administrative proceedings. The case was remanded for the district court to determine whether Maese was entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs under GRAMA’s fee-shifting provisions.

For practitioners, this case underscores the importance of timely asserting fee claims in responsive pleadings when defending or challenging GRAMA decisions in district court proceedings.