Wilbur 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.

• concluding that “the policies underlying the exhaustion requirement ha[d] been served” despite the plaintiff’s “failure to comply with the [agency’s] FOIA appeal deadline”
• holding that “exhaustion of administrative remedies is a mandatory prerequisite to a lawsuit under FOIA”
• holding that “failure to exhaust precludes judicial review if ‘the purposes of exhaustion’ and the ‘particular administrative scheme’ support such a bar” (citations omitted)
• holding that “[e]xhaustion of administrative remedies is generally required before seeking judicial review”
• holding that “[e]xhaustion of administrative remedies is generally required before seeking judicial review”
• holding that the “purposes and policies underlying the exhaustion requirement” are “to prevent premature interference with agency processes, to give the parties and the courts [the] benefit of the agency’s experience and expertise and to compile an adequate record for review”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).