From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Leeds v. Burns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 6, 1994
205 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

June 6, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The petitioner is not a lawyer and did not retain a lawyer to represent him in this proceeding. It was therefore, not possible for him to have earned or to have incurred the responsibility to pay attorneys' fees. The award of attorneys' fees sought by the petitioner is thus not authorized, either under the Freedom of Information Law (see, Public Officers Law § 89 [c]; see also, 5 U.S.C. § 552 [a] [4] [E]; Kay v. Ehrler, 499 U.S. 432; Benavides v. Bureau of Prisons, 993 F.2d 257; Aronson v. United States Dept. of Hous. Urban Dev., 866 F.2d 1; Crooker v. United States Dept. of Justice, 632 F.2d 916; Kuzma v. Internal Revenue Serv., 821 F.2d 930; Kuzma v. United States Postal Serv., 725 F.2d 16; Cunningham v. Federal Bur. of Investigation, 664 F.2d 338; Barrett v. Bureau of Customs, 651 F.2d 1087; Wolfel v United States, 711 F.2d 66; DeBold v. Stimson, 735 F.2d 1037; Merrell v. Block, 809 F.2d 639; Burke v. United States Dept. of Justice, 559 F.2d 1182), or under the Equal Access to Justice Act (see, CPLR 8602 [b]; see also, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 [d] [2] [A]; Hexamer v. Foreness, 997 F.2d 93; Demarest v. Manspeaker, 948 F.2d 655; Naekel v. Department of Transp., 845 F.2d 976; Merrell v. Block, supra; Crooker v. Environmental Protection Agency, 763 F.2d 16). The petitioner's arguments are without merit (see also, McReady v. Department of Consumer Regulatory Affairs, 618 A.2d 609 [DC App]; Donahue v. Thomas, 618 A.2d 601 [DC App]; Lev v. Lev, 10 Conn. App. 570, 524 A.2d 674; Atherton v Board of Supervisors, 176 Cal.App.3d 433, 222 Cal.Rptr. 56; Washburn v. Washburn, 475 A.2d 410 [DC App]; Note, Pro Se Can You Sue?: Attorney Fees for Pro Se Litigants, 34 Stan L Rev 659). Lawrence, J.P., Ritter, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Leeds v. Burns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 6, 1994
205 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Leeds v. Burns

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JACKSON LEEDS, Appellant, v. HAYWOOD BURNS, as Dean of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 6, 1994

Citations

205 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
613 N.Y.S.2d 46

Citing Cases

Trevino v. Pray

Moreover, if her request for attorney's fees were timely, it would still be denied because it was not…

Rodriguez v. Fischer

Regardless, the petitioner has not retained a lawyer to represent him in the proceedings and therefore is…