Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Housing Finance Agency

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that FNMA and Freddie Mac are not federal agencies for purposes of FOIA requests
• holding that the agency's \unexercised right to use and dispose of the records requested in this case is not enough to subject those records to FOIA\
• holding that document creators “intentionally relinquished control” over their records when they agreed to conservatorship by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, even though they seemingly retained access to the documents
• holding that an agency was not obligated to disclose external documents because “[the] public cannot learn anything about agency decision making from a document the agency neither created nor consulted”
• holding that documents transferred to FHFA by entities for which it was the conservator were not agency records, notwithstanding the entities’ intent to relinquish control and FHFA’s ability to use and dispose of the documents as it saw fit
• noting that when “a document [is] created by a third party,” and “none of [the agency’s] employees have read” it, “the degree [of integration] is none at all”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).