Topic
Every decision we've filed under Summary Judgment.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in a defamation case, ruling that the appellant's motion for additional discovery was untimely and that the statements were protected by common interest privilege. The court held that the appellant failed to meet the difficult burden of proving actual malice required to overcome that privilege.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the FBI, holding its search for Freedom of Information Act records was adequate and its withholdings justified. The court rejected the appellant's challenges to the search methodology and his claims of agency misconduct due to a lack of evidentiary support.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of derivative citizenship and Convention Against Torture relief, holding that the petitioner's father established paternity by legitimation under Baja California law. The court excused the waiver of the citizenship claim to avoid manifest injustice but found no genuine dispute of material fact requiring transfer to a district court.
The D.C. Circuit held that the liberal pleading standards typically afforded to pro se litigants do not automatically apply when the litigant is a licensed attorney. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of most claims and its grant of summary judgment, ruling that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leniency to the pro se lawyer.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed summary judgment for federal law enforcement agencies in two Freedom of Information Act lawsuits, ruling that their searches for records regarding death row inmate Daniel Troya were adequate. The court further held that the agencies properly withheld documents under multiple FOIA exemptions to protect privacy, confidential sources, and law enforcement techniques.
The Second Circuit held that periodic reviews of a Connecticut prisoner's administrative segregation status satisfied due process even while he was incarcerated in Virginia. However, the court found a genuine dispute of material fact regarding whether Virginia Department of Corrections administrative remedies were available to the plaintiff, rendering summary judgment on his First, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment claims inappropriate.