Cherry v. Belcher

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “privilege cover documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated” (emphasis added
• ‘Where possible, ‘facts that are separable from the privileged portion of a document should be disclosed.’ ”
• “[A] blanket approach to asserting the privilege is unacceptable and is itself grounds for denying invocation of the privilege.”
• “[E]ven if the government’s various delegations of authority ... could be viewed as proper ... [,] the government’s invocation of privilege contains two further procedural deficiencies.”
• “the party seeking protection must state with particularity what information is subject to the privilege [and] the information or documents sought to be shielded must be identified and described” (internal citations and quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).