Question

In: Operations Management

Case 17.4: Consumer Federation of America v. Department of Agriculture, 455 F.3d 283 (D.C. Cir. 2006)...

Case 17.4: Consumer Federation of America v. Department of Agriculture, 455 F.3d 283 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (p. 580)

Facts: In February 2001, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) published notice of a proposed rule regulating exposure to Listeria, a dangerous, food-borne bacterium that can be found in ready-to-eat meat and poultry. USDA later issued an interim final rule that Consumer Federation of America (CFA) regarded as significantly weaker than the originally proposed rule. Seeking to learn whether USDA officials had met exclusively, or nearly exclusively, with industry representatives who favored the weakening of the original proposed rule, CFA filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for access to the “public calendars" of five senior USDA officials and one USDA administrative assistant. The USDA calendars were continually updated, were used to conduct agency business, and were in fact relied upon by both their authors and their authors' colleagues to “facilitate the day-to-day operations of the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service.”

Issue: Were the calendars “agency records” as defined in FOIA?

Ruling: Yes. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the five senior officials’ calendars were agency records under FOIA and were subject to public access. The court ruled that since the USDA calendars were continually updated, distributed to employees, and used to conduct agency business, the calendars were included under FOIA. The court also ruled that the administrative assistant’s calendar was not an agency record covered by FOIA because it was not distributed among senior officials and was more of a personal time schedule.

Case Questions:

1.What did CFA expect to uncover through the use of FOIA?

2.What were the key factors in the court’s determination that calendars fell under FOIA?

3.If government officials know that they will have to reveal their personal calendars, wouldn’t that potentially chill necessary debate within or outside the agency?

4.True or false to the following questions

1. The publication of the proposed rule regulating exposure to Listeria is part of the Department of Agriculture’s adjudication function.

2. The decision of the Department of Agriculture not to provide a copy of the public calendars of the five senior USDA officials was likely made by an administrative law judge.

3. The public calendars of the five senior USDA officials should not be disclosed if they contain personal, private information.

4. Written summaries of discussions of Department of Agriculture officials undertaken to formulate a response to the FOIA litigation pursued by Consumer Federation of America must be disclosed under FOIA.

5. The decision of the Department of Agriculture not to disclose the public calendars of the five senior USDA officials must be made at an open, public meeting announced at least one week in advance as required by the Government in Sunshine Act.

Solutions

Expert Solution

  1. CFA trusted that amid ex parte gatherings with USDA authorities, the industry delegates had compelled the authorities to issue the weaker break last run the show. Keeping in mind the end goal to approve their doubts and decide if USDA authorities had met only with the business delegates, CFA documented a Federal Freedom of Information Act, ask for access to the electronic schedules of six senior authorities including data in regards to all gatherings with non-government people and the subject of those gatherings.
  2. The court decided that since the USDA date-books were ceaselessly refreshed, dispersed to representatives, and used to direct organization business, the logbooks were incorporated under FOIA. The court additionally decided that the clerical specialist's timetable was not an official record secured by FOIA in light of the fact that it was not disseminated among senior authorities and was to a greater degree an individual time plan.
  3. No, in my opinion, it is stated under the rule to distinguish agency records from personal records.
  4. A). Exposing literia is the part of department of agriculture is true.

b). True.

C). True,

d). False

e). true


Related Solutions

Case 2: Jackson v. Plainfield Healthcare Center, 612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010) (Mallor 15th p....
Case 2: Jackson v. Plainfield Healthcare Center, 612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010) (Mallor 15th p. 1349). The following facts are inspired by, but change and expand upon, the facts appearing in the above cited case. Two residents of Wheatfield Healthcare Center, a privately run nursing home employing more than 50 employees, requested that only white employees provide their care. Wheatfield complied with its residents' racial preference partly due to its interpretation of a state regulation governing long-term care facilities,...
Brief the following case: Joseph Radtke, S.c., Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-appellee, 895 F.2d...
Brief the following case: Joseph Radtke, S.c., Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-appellee, 895 F.2d 1196 (7th Cir. 1990) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/895/1196/46650/
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT