The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice Environmental Defense Fund v. Office of Management and Budget

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the inclusion of personal information in documents did not preclude them from being “agency records” where the “personal information can be redacted”
• explaining that “[t]he requirement that materials sought by a private party be ‘agency records’ is jurisdictional—[i.e.,] only when an agency withholds an agency record does the district court have authority to compel disclosure” (emphasis added)
• focusing on the “use of the document” when determining if employees’ quasi-personal records were also agency records
• considering “the extent to which the document is used to conduct agency business”
• \The personal information contained in the agendas . . . may be redacted from the copies made available to BNA.\
• daily agenda circulated to staff members and stored in desk drawer of personal secretary found to constitute agency records

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).