Crooker v. U. S. Department of State

498 F. Supp. 210, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8852
CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedOctober 30, 1979
DocketCiv. A. No. 78-1867
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 498 F. Supp. 210 (Crooker v. U. S. Department of State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crooker v. U. S. Department of State, 498 F. Supp. 210, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8852 (D.D.C. 1979).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION

JOYCE HENS GREEN, District Judge.

Seeking disclosure, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as amended, of any Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records maintained under his name by defendant United States Department of State, plaintiff Michael Alan Crooker, a federal prison inmate who is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, has moved for summary judgment and requested that he be awarded attorney fees. Defendant likewise has asked that summary judgment be granted in its favor. There being no material fact in dispute between the parties, the Court will grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment and deny plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as well as his application for attorney fees.

Facts

Plaintiff’s FOIA request to defendant for all FBI files maintained under his name was made on August 1, 1978. After receiving no response, plaintiff instituted this action. His complaint was received by the Court on September 28, 1978, and was filed on October 6, 1978. By letter dated October 5, 1978, the State Department responded to plaintiff’s request and notified him that the thirteen pages of FBI documents he sought had been referred to the FBI as a result of his earlier January 1977 request for State Department documents and were released to him by the Bureau on April 17, 1978.

Plaintiff’s Request for Documents

Plaintiff’s single contention with regard to the thirteen pages of documents in question is that under section 552 the State Department must release the materials directly to plaintiff, regardless of their origin. In considering plaintiff’s assertion, the Court notes that on at least two other occasions, judges of this court have held that FOIA plaintiffs “will not be permitted to [211]*211litigate the same documents against more than one agency.” Lynas v. United States Department of State, Civ. No. 76-1880, slip, op. at 2 (D.D.C. Nov. 30, 1978); accord, Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. CIA, 458 F.Supp. 798, at 800-801 (D.D.C. 1978). Likewise, the Court finds there is no requirement that the agency from which the documents are requested release copies of those materials when the originating agency has already done so, as the FBI has done in this instance.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Crooker v. United States Marshals Service
641 F. Supp. 1141 (District of Columbia, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
498 F. Supp. 210, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crooker-v-u-s-department-of-state-dcd-1979.