Stalcup v. Central Intelligence Agency

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a document labeled “draft” was properly withheld as a deliberative document because it was, inter alia, “passed on to agency management for possible policy changes”
• noting that individuals have an “inherent privacy interest irrespective of any government intervention”
• noting that individuals have an \inherent privacy interest irrespective of any government intervention\
• \The omission of a single document in this case does not negate what is otherwise a reasonable inquiry.\
• “The omission of a single document in this case does not negate what is otherwise a reasonable inquiry.”
• disclosure unwarranted when it would not “yield any new information”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).