Harold Martin v. Department of Justice

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that sufficient public interest in disclosure may outweigh countervailing privacy interests in material exempt under (b)(7)(C)
• explaining that “the public interest sought to be advanced” must be “more specific than [the requestor] having the information for its own sake” (citation omitted)
• noting that the “issue remains an open question in this circuit”
• explaining that under Supreme Court precedent “a person’s privacy interest in law enforcement records that name him is not diminished by the fact that the events they describe were once a matter of public record”
• finding no basic unfairness when plaintiff had “ample opportunity to have his challenge heard” and finding “no circumstances sufficient to exempt him from the rules of preclusion”
• affirming the district court’s holding that the plaintiff did not satisfy the public interest exception because his interest in the “allegedly exculpatory evidence” he sought was “private in nature”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).