NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
v.
GETMAN ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The National Labor Relations Board sought a stay of a district court order requiring it to disclose employee names and addresses for labor representation elections under the Freedom of Information Act. Justice Black denied the stay, finding no exception in the Freedom of Information Act that would permit the Board to withhold the requested records, despite the government's argument that disclosure would interfere with representation election procedures under the National Labor Relations Act.
[1] A government agency must make identifiable records available to any person upon request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. …
[2] The Freedom of Information Act does not contain an exception that authorizes an agency to refuse to promptly turn over requested records.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
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 seen 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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973)…. See footnote 1, supra. . “The Legislative plan creates a liberal disclosure requirement limited only by specific exemptions, which are to be narrowly construed.” Getman v. N. L. R. B., 146 U. S. App.D.C. 209, 211, 450 F. 2d 670, 672, stay denied, 404 U.S. 1204, 92 S.Ct. 7, 30 L.Ed. 2d 8 (1971). See also Bristol-Myers v. F. T. C., 138 U.S.App.D.C. 22, 25, 424 F. 2d 935, 938, cert, denied, 400 U.S. 824, 91 S.Ct. 46, 27 L.Ed.2d 52 (1970) ; M. A. Shapiro & Co. v. S. E. C., 339 F.Supp. 467, 469 (D.D. C.1972).…
-
Cuneo v. Schlesinger, 484 F.2d 1086 (D.C. Cir. 1973)…-, 484 F. 2d 820 (1973). (1973). . “The legislative plan creates a liberal disclosure requirement, limited only by specific exemptions which are to be narrowly construed.” Getman v. NLRB, 146 U.S.App. D.C. 209, 211, 450 F. 2d 670, 672, stay denied, 404 U.S. 1204, 92 S.Ct. 7, 30 L.Ed.2d 8 (1971). See also, Bristol Myers v. FTC, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 22, 25, 424 F. 2d 935, 938, cert, denied, 400 U.S. 824, 91 S.Ct. 46, 27 L.Ed.2d 52 (1970) ; M.A.Schapiro & Co. v. SEC, 339 F.Supp. 467, 469 (D.D.C.1972). . 5 U.S.C.…
-
Hawkes v. Internal Revenue Serv., 467 F.2d 787 (6th Cir. 1972)…gislation (5 U.S.C. §, 552(b)). See Tennessean Newspapers, Inc. v. Federal Housing Administration, 6th Cir., 464 F. 2d 657, No. 71-1676 (decided May 4, 1972); David v. Soucie, supra; Getman v. N. L. R. B., 450 F. 2d 670 (D.C.Cir. 1971), stay denied, 404 U.S. 1204, 92 S.Ct. 7, 30 L.Ed.2d 8 (1971). Apart from any, general limit on the use of equitable considerations to bar otherwise appropriate disclosure under the Act there is good reason to believe that the Congress intended to foreclose objections to discl…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence