Cases pin-citing National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · Go Syfert
Search » Famous passages » Cases pin-citing National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Cases pin-citing National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.  ·  1975  ·  80 pinpoint citations from 29 cases, 25 distinct passages.

Aguiar v. Drug Enforcement Admin.  ·  2018-09-24  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
"Nor is the agency required to identify, after the fact, those pre-existing documents which contain the 'circumstances of the case' to which the opinion may have referred, and which are not identified by the party seeking disclosure."
Heffernan v. Azar  ·  2018-06-27  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  pin 95 S. Ct. at 1504
"Concern by an agency employee or consultant/expert that his or her views and analyses would be publicly disseminated would result in a more cautious, less effective performance of his or her duties."
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. U.S. Dep't of Justice  ·  2018-02-28  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
"if the memoranda ... fall within one of the Act's exempt categories, our inquiry is at an end, for the Act 'does not apply' to such documents."
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. United States Department of Justice  ·  2018-02-28  ·  District of Columbia  ·  pin 421 U.S. at 132
“if the memoranda . . . fall within one of the Act’s exempt categories, our inquiry is at an ,end, for the Act ‘does not apply’ to such documents.”
Wren v. U. S. Dep't of Justice  ·  2017-10-19  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
"It is well settled that an agency is not required by FOIA to create a document that does not exist in order to satisfy a request."
De Sousa v. Central Intelligence Agency  ·  2017-03-09  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[I]t is reasonable to construe Exemption 5 to exempt those documents, and only those documents, normally privileged in the civil discovery context.”
Environmental Integrity Project v. United States Environmental Protection Agency  ·  2016-03-29  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[T]he disclosure obligation ‘does not apply’ to those documents described in the nine enumerated exempt categories listed in § 552(b).”
Blajro v. Citizenship  ·  2015-10-23  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[T]he Act clearly intended to give any member of the public as much right to disclosure as one with a special interest therein.... ”
Agility Public Warehousing Company K.S.C. v. National Security Agency  ·  2015-07-10  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“The Act is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency action and not to benefit private litigants.”
Neary v. Federal Deposit Insurance Company  ·  2015-05-19  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“The Act is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency action and not to benefit private litigants.”
American Civil Liberties Union v. United States Department of Justice  ·  2015-03-03  ·  S.D. New York  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[I]t is reasonable to construe Exemption 5 to exempt those documents, and only those documents, normally privileged in the civil discovery context.”
Coles v. National Labor Relations Board  ·  2014-03-26  ·  S.D. Ohio  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Congress has delegated to the Office of General Counsel on ‘behalf of the Board’ the unreviewable authority to determine whether a complaint shall be filed”
Soghoian v. United States Department of Justice  ·  2012-07-31  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Whatever the outer boundaries of the attorney’s work-product rule are, the rule clearly applies to memoranda prepared by an attorney in contemplation of litigation which set forth the attorney’s theory of the case and his litigation strategy.”
Hall v. Central Intelligence Agency  ·  2009-11-12  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“it is difficult to see how the quality of a decision will be affected by communications with respect to the decision occurring after the decision is finally reached”
Jackson Hospital Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board  ·  2009-05-15  ·  District of Columbia  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 44 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[I]t is difficult to see how the quality of a decision will be affected by communications with respect to the decision occurring after the decision is finally reached ... as long as prior communications and the ingredients of the decisionmaking process are not disclosed.”
In re Apollo Group, Inc.  ·  2008-06-20  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Sears Roebuck ”
National Institute of Military Justice v. United States Department of Defense  ·  2008-01-11  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“ ‘(h)uman experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances ... to the detriment of the decisionmaking process’ ”
Trentadue v. Integrity Committee  ·  2007-09-07  ·  Tenth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“The cases ... focus on documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.”
Dairyland Power Cooperative v. United States  ·  2007-06-29  ·  Federal Claims  ·  pin 44 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Agencies are, and properly should be, engaged in a continuing process of examining their policies; this process will generate memoranda containing recommendations which do not ripen into agency decisions; and the lower courts should be wary of interfering with this process.”
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice  ·  2004-03-03  ·  District of Columbia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“[I]t is reasonable to construe Exemption 5 to exempt those documents, and only those documents, normally privileged in the civil discovery context.”
Herrick v. Garvey  ·  2000-12-13  ·  D. Wyoming  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“the [FOIA] is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency action and not to benefit private litigants”
American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1164 v. United States Department of Health & Human Services  ·  1999-08-26  ·  D. Massachusetts  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“That Congress had the Government’s executive privilege specifically in mind in adopting Exemption 5 is clear....”
James P. Gabel v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service  ·  1995-05-05  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  pin 421 U.S. at 132
" t he Freedom of Information Act is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency decisions and not to benefit private litigants."
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation v. United States Deparment of Justice  ·  1993-10-01  ·  S.D. New York  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Exemption 5, properly construed, calls for ‘disclosure of all “opinions and interpretations” which embody the agency’s effective law and policy’ ”
State v. Warner  ·  1986-07-18  ·  Arizona Supreme Court  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“Whatever the outer boundaries of the attorney’s work product doctrine, the rule clearly applies to memoranda which set forth the attorney’s theory of the case and his litigation strategy”
Metex Corp. v. ACS Industries, Inc.  ·  1984-11-14  ·  Third Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“the [FOIA] is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency action and not to benefit private litigants”
Metex Corporation v. Acs Industries  ·  1984-11-14  ·  Third Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
"the [FOIA] is fundamentally designed to inform the public about agency action and not to benefit private litigants"
The Washington Post Company v. United States Department of Health and Human Services  ·  1982-09-24  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  6 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
"Sears' rights under (FOIA) are neither increased nor decreased by reason of the fact that it claims an interest ... greater than that shared by the average member of the public."
Chilivis v. Securities & Exchange Commission  ·  1982-04-23  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 421 L. Ed. 2d at 29
“we hold .. . that Exemption 5 does not apply to any document which falls within the meaning of the phrase ‘final opinion’ ”
Page 1 of 2   Next →