Case Detail
| Case Title | CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON v. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| District | District of Columbia | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| City | Washington, DC | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Case Number | 1:2007cv01620 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Date Filed | 2007-09-13 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Date Closed | 2008-03-10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Judge | Judge Rosemary M. Collyer | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Plaintiff | CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Case Description | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Justice for records concerning contacts with certain individuals or entities pertaining to a congressional inquiry into the firing of U.S. Attorneys. CREW also requested expedited processing and a fee waiver. The agency denied CREW's request for expedited processing. CREW filed an administrative appeal of the agency's denial of its request for expedited processing. However, after hearing nothing further from the agency, CREW filed suit. Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Expedited processing, Litigation - Attorney's fees | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Defendant | U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Opinion/Order [10] FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Rosemary Collyer has ruled that the Justice Department conducted an adequate search for records concerning any email contacts Department staff had with political consultant Mark McKinnon pertaining to his offer to devise a media strategy concerning the firings of U.S. Attorneys. Responding to a FOIA request from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the Office of Information and Privacy conducted a search of both current and former employees' email records. The search produced no records. CREW questioned the adequacy of the search, arguing that it could not tell what specific files were searched, how many files were searched, or what specific former employee's files were searched. Collyer disagreed, noting instead that "DOJ in fact identified the files searched â€" the email files of all current employees in the Office of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Associate Attorney General and the email files of former employees most likely to have records responsive to the request. CREW asked for email; obviously, the files searched were email files. There is no need for further specificity." CREW also argued that the agency had failed to identify the actual terms used by agency employees in conducting the search. Again, Collyer rejected the claim, pointing out that "CREW's FOIA request sought email messages between Mark McKinnon, Maverick Media, Inc., and Public Strategies, Inc. and any current or former DOJ employee concerning any aspect of the Congressional inquiry into the firings of U.S. Attorneys. [The agency's] declaration must be accorded 'a presumption of good faith, which cannot be rebutted by purely speculative claims about the existence and discoverability of other documents.' CREW has not presented any claim that would rebut this presumption of good faith."
Issues: Adequacy - Search | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| User-contributed Documents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Docket Events (Hide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
