Public Citizen Health Research Group v. United States Department of Labor
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- Shapiro v. Department of Justice (District Court, District of Columbia 2020)
- Yelder v. United States Department of Defense (District Court, District of Columbia 2008)
- Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity v. Central Intelligence Agency and Stansfield Turner (D.C. Cir. 1981)
- Property of the People, Inc. v. Department of Justice (District Court, District of Columbia 2018)
- Kearns v. Federal Aviation Administration (District Court, District of Columbia 2018)
- Prop. of the People v. U.S. Dep't of Justice (D.C. Cir. 2018)
- Kearns v. Fed. Aviation Admin. (D.C. Cir. 2018)
- Rollins v. United States Department of State (District Court, District of Columbia 2014)
- Smith v. Department of Labor (District Court, District of Columbia 2011)
- Smith v. United States Department of Labor (District Court, District of Columbia 2011)
- Billington v. United States Department of Justice (District Court, District of Columbia 2003)
- Pack v. Beyer (District Court, D. New Jersey 1994)
- William J. Carter v. United States Department of Commerce (D.C. Cir. 1987)
- Marzen v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1986)
- Professional Review Organization of Florida, Inc. v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (District Court, District of Columbia 1985)
- Citizens for Environmental Quality, Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture (District Court, District of Columbia 1984)
- Irwin B. Arieff v. U.S. Department of the Navy (D.C. Cir. 1983)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
Upon consideration of appellee’s motion for summary affirmance, appellants’ motion for summary reversal, the responses thereto, and the record in this case, and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying memorandum, it is
ORDERED by the Court that the motion for summary affirmance is denied, the motion for summary reversal is granted, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the accompanying memorandum.
was a member of this panel, but did not participate in the foregoing order.
*809 MEMORANDUM
In the opinion of this Court, the District Court should have looked at the secret, in camera affidavit of Mr. Miller explaining why the disclosure of the two lines would cause extreme injury to his interest in personal privacy. While the District Court did have a document to examine (Mr. Miller’s Standard Form 171), the two-line item on that form does not alone explain the reasons behind the claim of exemption under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). The only matter available to the court that would have enabled it to properly decide de novo the propriety of Miller’s claim that the material was exempt from disclosure was the proffered in camera affidavit. Since the District Court has the duty to decide the case on the fullest offered record, it should not have refused to examine the affidavit. See Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency, 178 U.S.App.D.C. 243, 246-247, 546 F.2d 1009, 1012-1013 (1976).
In addition, the language of 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) . . would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” has been interpreted by this Court as requiring a balancing of the interest in personal privacy against the public interest in disclosure. See Rural Housing Alliance v. United States Dept. of Agr., 162 U.S.App.D.C. 122, 126-127, 498 F.2d 73, 77-78 (1974), and Getman v. NLRB, 146 U.S.App.D.C. 209, 450 F.2d 670 (1971). Since this is a balancing test, any invasion of privacy can prevail, so long as the public interest balanced against it is sufficiently weaker. The threat to privacy thus need not be patent or obvious to be relevant. It need only outweigh the public interest.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.