Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 11 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Heily v. United States Department of Commerce.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Heily v. United States Department of Commerce Anchor | green | “that there are other documents he is entitled to . . . is inadequate to withstand a motion for summary judgment.” | 5 |
| 2 | Bruce Bowers v. U.S. Department of Justice | green | “if there is no reason to question the credibility of the experts and the plaintiff makes no showing in response to that of the government, a court should hesitate to substitute its judgment of the sensitivity of the information for that of the agency.” | 3 |
| 3 | Bruce Bowers v. U.S. Department of Justice | green | “information requested and the exemptions claimed.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.