People v. Dietz

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “post- judgment change[s] in circumstances” present a ground for relief pursuant to Rule 60(b)
• holding that “the district court’s grant of summary judgment without discovery was within its discretion” because “plaintiffs ha[d] made no showing of [agency] bad faith”
• holding that the plaintiff was not entitled to discovery because the court properly ruled on the motion for summary judgment based on the agency’s affidavits alone
• holding that in FOIA Exemption 3 cases “the sole issue for decision is the existence of a relevant statute and the inclusion of withheld material within that statute’s coverage”
• holding that in FOIA Exemption 3 cases \the sole issue for decision is the existence of a relevant statute and the inclusion of withheld material within that statute's coverage\
• holding that in FOIA Exemption 3 cases “the sole issue for decision is the existence of a relevant statute and the inclusion of withheld material within that statute’s coverage”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).