Lemane v. Lemane

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that most of the CIA’s Glomar responses were insufficient but granting the CIA a “second chance” to present a “a more targeted Glomar submission”
• declining to address whether the Wilson test “has been supplanted entirely by the ‘logical and plausible’ standard”
• giving “the CIA a second chance” to provide a sufficient response to plaintiff's request consistent with the Court’s ruling, in light of the national security interests at play
• rejecting government's argument that matching and specificity criteria - as adopted by the Second Circuit in Wilson v. CIA , 586 F.3d 171 , 186 (2d Cir. 2009) following Fitzgibbon - is required in Glomar waiver context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).