Despio v. Crews

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the government’s production of responsive documents, however belatedly, moots a FOIA claim
• holding that in reviewing a grant of summary judgment in a FOIA case, we first review de novo whether there is an adequate factual basis to support the district court’s decision, and if there is, we then review the district court’s conclusions of fact for clear error
• holding that in reviewing a grant of summary judgment in a FOIA case, we first review de novo whether there is an adequate factual basis to support the district court’s decision, and if there is, we then review the district court’s conclusions of fact for clear error
• holding that in reviewing a grant of summary judgment in a FOIA case, we first review de novo whether there is an adequate factual basis to support the district court’s decision, and if there is, we then review the district court’s conclusions of fact for clear error
• holding that in reviewing a grant of summary judgment in a FOIA case, we first review de novo whether there is an adequate factual basis to support the district court’s decision, and if there is, we then review the district court’s conclusions of fact for clear error
• “Pisclosure of most of these records may indeed constitute a nontrivial invasion of personal privacy, but the [Fisheries Service] has yet to articulate why.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).