Scruggs v. Speer

How courts have described this case

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

• denying plaintiffs motion to compel because conversations relating to overtime policy were covered by deliberative process privilege
• noting that the Court of Federal Claims recognizes both privileges and discussing “[t]he view . . . consistent with binding precedent . . . that any assertion of the deliberative process privilege must be made in the context of an executive privilege”
• Communications are not within the purview of the privilege unless they are both (1) “predecisional” in that they have been generated prior to an agency’s adoption of a policy or decision and (2
• delineating the requirements for asserting deliberative process privilege
• denying plaintiffs’ motion to compel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).