Defau v. Pelane

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that letter detailing “ethics undertakings” of executive branch nominee was “deliberative because it served as ‘a direct part’ of the collaborative process of assessing how a prospective agency head should manage potential conflicts of interest”
• finding that “case law is clear that there is a substantial privacy interest in full email addresses”
• finding emails on proposed talking points and other information considered for use in preparing nominees for Senate confirmation hearings protected by the deliberative process privilege
• explaining 21 that “Courts in this jurisdiction have repeatedly concluded that talking points prepared for use in congressional testimony are deliberative and predecisional documents subject to FOIA Exemption 5”
• finding “five-page email exchange” protected under deliberative process privilege because they were “generated as part of the collaborative process between a nominee and an agency of determining how the nominee should field questions from Congress”
• courts “have repeatedly concluded that talking points prepared for use in congressional testimony are deliberative and predecisional documents subject to FOIA exemption 5”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).