§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Talib W. Abdur-Rashid, Appellant,v.New York City Police Department, et al., Respondents.--------------------------------In the Matter of Samir Hashmi, Appellant, v. New York City Police Department, et al., Respondents.

Brief

16 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.

    437 U.S. 214 (1978)   Cited 946 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a FOIA requestor's rights are neither “diminished” nor “enhanced” in light of a “particular, litigation-generated need for these materials”

  2. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn

    420 U.S. 469 (1975)   Cited 945 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a radio station could not constitutionally be held liable for broadcasting the name of a rape victim, because the victim's name was contained in public records

  3. Military Audit Project v. Casey

    656 F.2d 724 (D.C. Cir. 1981)   Cited 1,214 times
    Holding that the CIA did not waive the applicability of Exemption 1 to all classified information relating to a subject by voluntarily releasing some formerly classified information about that subject

  4. Gould v. New York City Police Department

    89 N.Y.2d 267 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 405 times
    In Matter of Gould v. New York City Police Dept. (89 N.Y.2d 267, 274-275), the Court of Appeals noted that "[a]ll government records are * * * presumptively open for public inspection and copying" under FOIL "unless they fall within one of the enumerated exemptions of Public Officers Law § 87(2)".

  5. Wilner v. National Sec. Agency

    592 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2009)   Cited 192 times
    Holding that similarly worded provision related to the National Security Agency falls under Exemption 3

  6. Vaughn v. Rosen

    523 F.2d 1136 (D.C. Cir. 1975)   Cited 361 times
    Holding that the agency's affidavits fail to carry its burden of proof "because at no place do they define, explain, or limit the 'deliberative process' which the Government seeks to protect

  7. Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency

    546 F.2d 1009 (D.C. Cir. 1976)   Cited 333 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding CIA refusal to confirm or deny existence of records of CIA connection to activities of ship named the Hughes Glomar Explorer

  8. Matter of Fink v. Lefkowitz

    47 N.Y.2d 567 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 299 times
    Noting that FOIL "established a general policy [in favor of] disclosure"

  9. Lesher v. Hynes

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 2414 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 70 times
    In Lesher, for example, the prosecutor's general explanation that the correspondence sought contained information concerning the particulars of the crime and the identities and statements of witnesses and that "its release posed an obvious risk of prematurely tipping the District Attorney's hand" was sufficient to support reliance on the exemption (id. at 67-68).

  10. Encore College Bookstores, Inc. v. Auxiliary Service Corp.

    87 N.Y.2d 410 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 99 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued November 28, 1995 Decided December 27, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, William P. McCooe, J. Joseph A. Faraldo, Kew Gardens, for appellant. Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn Berman, New York City (Suzanne M. Berger and James M. Altman of counsel), for Auxiliary Service Corporation of the State University of New York at Farmingdale, respondent. Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (John P. Dellera, Victoria A. Graffeo

  11. Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings

    5 U.S.C. § 552   Cited 12,149 times   555 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party