Llinas v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “the federal interests embodied in section 1983 militate in favor of compelling disclosure in this case” and overriding CPL §160.50
• “[T]he harm envisaged by the Department to its ability to conduct internal investigations is, at best, quite speculative.”
• “[Federal courts have repeatedly recognized the necessity for disclosure of such files in a variety of circumstances.”
• “In any event, promises of confidentiality cannot be binding in the absence of legal authority . . . .” (citing Clavir)
• “since the interviewed officers’ names have already been disclosed, there is no danger that disclosure of their names in the documents would have an ‘impact’ upon them.”
• “The key consideration is the importance of the information to the plaintiffs’ case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).