§Why CasetextPricing

Merrill v. Holder et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss . MOTION for Summary Judgment ., 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment . and Reply in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Document

44 Cited authorities

  1. Milner v. Department of the Navy

    562 U.S. 2011 (2011)   Cited 716 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FOIA exemptions are "explicitly made exclusive"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

    421 U.S. 132 (1975)   Cited 2,048 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FOIA does not compel agencies to write or create material to explain disclosed documents

  3. Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart

    427 U.S. 539 (1976)   Cited 1,432 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the record [was] lacking in evidence to support" a finding that alternative "measures might not be adequate"

  4. Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville

    405 U.S. 156 (1972)   Cited 1,525 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding vague an ordinance that punished “vagrants,” defined to include “rogues and vagabonds,” “persons who use juggling,” and “common night walkers”

  5. United States v. United States District Court

    407 U.S. 297 (1972)   Cited 1,390 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no warrant exception existed for "domestic security" surveillance but explicitly stating that the Court had "not addressed, and express[ed] no opinion as to, the issues which may be involved with respect to activities of foreign powers or their agents"

  6. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn

    420 U.S. 469 (1975)   Cited 946 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

  7. United States v. Aguilar

    515 U.S. 593 (1995)   Cited 381 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the defendant lacks knowledge that his actions are likely to affect the judicial proceeding, he lacks the requisite intent to obstruct"

  8. U.S. v. Amodeo

    71 F.3d 1044 (2d Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,275 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court abused its discretion by unsealing record

  9. Butterworth v. Smith

    494 U.S. 624 (1990)   Cited 128 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding state confidentiality law unconstitutional "insofar as [it] prohibits a grand jury witness from disclosing his own testimony after the term of the grand jury has ended," but leaving in place "that part of the . . . statute which prohibited] the witness from disclosing the testimony of another witness" (emphasis omitted

  10. Crooker v. B. of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms

    670 F.2d 1051 (D.C. Cir. 1981)   Cited 252 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that although government could rely on an exemption it raised for the first time in the district court, it could not do so for the first time in the appellate court because otherwise there would be prejudice to requesting party who had had no opportunity to challenge and test the agency's evidence with respect to the applicability of the exemption

  11. Section 2703 - Required disclosure of customer communications or records

    18 U.S.C. § 2703   Cited 1,214 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that these providers "shall disclose" such information "when the governmental entity uses an administrative subpoena authorized by a Federal or State statute"

  12. Section 1461 - Mailing obscene or crime-inciting matter

    18 U.S.C. § 1461   Cited 421 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Mailing obscene matter

  13. Section 2709 - Counterintelligence access to telephone toll and transactional records

    18 U.S.C. § 2709   Cited 45 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Containing the NSL non-disclosure requirement mandating that "no [ECSP] . . . shall disclose to any person that the [FBI] has sought or obtained access to information or records under this section"