Stonehill v. Internal Revenue Service

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 “bare conclusory assessment” that disclosing a name would violate that person’s privacy is insufficient
• ordering release of an IRS agent’s name because defendant only provided generic and conclusory explanations as to why it should be withheld
• finding collateral estoppel applicable to FOIA claim because the issues raised in that case were the same issues raised in prior litigation
• recognizing unsettled question in the First Circuit
• collateral estoppel applicable in FOIA action where the withheld documents at issue in the previous litigation were the “same documents that are in issue in [the instant] proceeding”
• collateral estoppel applicable in FOIA action where the withheld documents at issue in the previous litigation were the “same documents that are in issue in [the instant] proceeding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).