Appeals Granted Case DAILY PRESS, LLC ET AL. v. OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY TO THE SUPREME COURT, ET AL. (Record Number 160889) From The Circuit Court of the City of Newport News; D. Pugh, Judge. Counsel Hunter W. Sims, Jr, R. Johan Conrad, Jr. and Lauren Tallent Rogers (Kaufman & Canoles, P.C.) for appellant. Stuart A. Raphael (Solicitor General) and Trevor S. Cox and Matthew R. McGuire (Office of the Attorney General) for appellee the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia. William W. Tunner and William D. Prince IV (ThompsonMcMullan) for appellees Samuel H. Cooper Jr. et al. Assignments of Error 1. The Circuit Court for the City of Newport News erred in failing to grant The Daily Press, LLC’s and David Ress’ request for access to public records from The Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia under Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act, concluding that respondent OES was not a “custodian,” as that term is used by FOIA, of the public records sought through the Daily Press’ July 17, 2015 FOIA request to OES. a) The trial court erred in concluding that OES was not a “custodian,” as that term is used by FOIA, because OES was a “public body” in possession of “public records” and, therefore, OES had a statutory disclosure requirement under FOIA. b) The trial court erred in concluding that the historic course of dealing between OES and the Circuit Court Clerks was relevant or determinative of whether OES was the “custodian” of the public records at issue under FOIA. C) The trial court erred to the extent it adopted OES’ argument that Virginia Code § 2.2-3704(J) applied and was determinative as to the issue of “custodian” under FOIA because (1) the information was never “transferred,” and (2) the information was not for the purposes of “storage, maintenance or archiving.” 2. The trial court erred in declining to rule on whether the public records should be disclosed under FOIA, i.e., whether a FOIA exemption applied, simply because the FOIA Request was directed to OES and not the Circuit Court Clerks. a) The “court records required to be maintained by law” FOIA exemption, at Virginia Code § 2.2-3703(a)(5), is not applicable to the information sought (regardless of who is the “custodian”). b) The trial court erred in concluding the Circuit Court Clerks did not implicitly consent to the release of the information. 3. The trial court erred in failing to award the Petitioners their attorneys’ fees. Date Granted 09-19-2016