Skip to main content
· 12/15/2006

Banks v. Office of the Senate Sergeant-At-Arms

Citations

  • 471 F.3d 1341
  • 374 U.S. App. D.C. 93
  • 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 30823
  • 89 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 42,667
  • 99 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 801
  • 2006 WL 3687761

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • defendant “never pressed its objections and assured its opponent that it would produce a privilege log”
  • “So reluctant are we to consider [advisory] mandamus relief that even where we have been presented really extraordinary cases, we are careful to caution against indiscriminate mandamus review.” (quotation marks omitted)
  • “We do not grant mandamus relief for the same reason: the appellant has an adequate remedy at law and may appeal the contested decision following a final judgment.”
  • “So reluctant are we to consider [advisory] mandamus relief that even where we have been presented really extraordinary cases, we are careful to caution against indiscriminate mandamus review.” (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Henderson, Randolph, Griffith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.