Media Research Center v. U.S. 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.

• noting that “when government attorneys act as ‘legal advisors’ to an agency considering litigation that may arise from [a] challenge to a government program, a specific claim is not required to justify the assertion of [the work-product doctrine].”
• “An agency’s search is not presumed unreasonable because it fails to find every potentially responsive document.”
• “[A]n agency’s search is not presumed unreasonable because it fails to find every potentially responsive document.”
• declarations sufficient to determine e-mails were not sent in employee’s official capacity
• “[A]n agency’s justification for invoking a FOIA exemption is sufficient if it appears ‘logical’ or ‘plausible.’” (quoting Larson v. Dep’t of State, 565 F.3d 857, 862 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
• declarations sufficient to determine e-mails were not sent in employee's official capacity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).