Supreme Court of the United States, 1971

National Labor Relations Board v. Getman

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided July 27, 1971 · Black

404 U.S. 1204; 92 S. Ct. 7; 30 L. Ed. 2d 8; 1971 U.S. LEXIS 3618; 78 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2100 (United States Reports)

Cases that cite this one

20 later published cases cite this decision.

Tennessean Newspapers, Inc. v. Federal Housing Administration (6th Cir. 1972)
Gilbert A. Cuneo v. James A. Schlesinger, Secretary of Defense (D.C. Cir. 1973)
A. Kenneth Hawkes v. Internal Revenue Service (6th Cir. 1972)
Cunningham v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1981)
Fonda v. Central Intelligence Agency (District Court, District of Columbia 1977)
American Federation of Government Employees, Afl-Cio, Local 1345 v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (D.C. Cir. 1986)
Al Louis Ripskis v. Department of Housing and Urban Development (D.C. Cir. 1984)
Board of Trade of the City of Chicago v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (D.C. Cir. 1980)
Smith Simpson v. Cyrus R. Vance, Secretary of State (D.C. Cir. 1980)
Consumers Union of the United States, Inc. And Public Citizen's Health Research Group v. Consumer Product Safety Commission (D.C. Cir. 1978)
Caplan v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms of the Department of the Treasury of the United States (District Court, S.D. New York 1978)
Aug v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (District Court, District of Columbia 1976)
Clarence M. Ditlow v. George P. Shultz, Secretary, Department of Treasury (D.C. Cir. 1975)
Washington Research Project, Inc. v. Department of Health, Education and Welfare (D.C. Cir. 1974)
Kreindler v. Department of the Navy of the United States (District Court, S.D. New York 1974)
B & C Tire Co., Inc. v. INTERNAL REV. SERV., DEPT. OF TR., US (United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama 1974)
Robert G. Vaughn v. Bernard Rosen, Executive Director, United States Civil Service Commission (D.C. Cir. 1973)
Joan S. Mahan V (Supreme Court of the United States 1971)
Pierman v. Stryker Corporation (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 2020)
Lane County v. Walker (Or. Ct. App. 1977)

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 of the Court

MR. Justice Black,

Acting Circuit Justice.

Respondents, two law professors who are undertaking a study of labor representation elections, applied for and obtained an order from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia requiring the National Labor Relations Board to provide respondents “with names and addresses of employees eligible to vote in approximately 35 elections to be designated by (respondents).” Respondents base their claim to the information on the language of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U. S. C. § 552 (a)(3), which requires that a Government agency “on request for identifiable records . . . shall make the records promptly available to any person.” The Government has filed an application seeking a stay of the order of the District Court. This application was assigned to me in the absence of The Chief Justice.

The Government applies for a stay on the ground that the District Court order requiring the Board to comply with the Freedom of Information Act and deliver the records in question to respondents would interfere with the representation election procedures under the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, as amended. The Board was created by Congress and Congress has *1205seen fit to make identifiable records of the Board and other Government agencies available to any person upon proper request. I find no exception in the Freedom of Information Act which would authorize the Board to refuse promptly to turn over the requested records. I deny the application for stay without prejudice to the Government to present its application to another Member of this Court.

It is so ordered.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.