Daniel Cvijanovich v. Secret Service

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided May 29, 2020·No. 19-3503·Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

No. 19-3503

Daniel Cvijanovich

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

United States Secret Service

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo

Submitted: May 26, 2020

Filed: May 29, 2020

[Unpublished]

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Daniel Cvijanovich appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his pro se Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) action. After a careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to review the requested unredacted documents in camera, see Peltier v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 563 F.3d 754, 759 (8th Cir. 2009) (decision to perform in camera inspection is reviewed for abuse of discretion; in camera review should be limited as it is contrary to the traditional judicial role of deciding issues in an adversarial context upon evidence produced openly in court); and did not err in granting summary judgment, see Madel v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 784 F.3d 448, 451 (8th Cir. 2015) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo; summary judgment is appropriate where an agency proves that it has fully discharged its obligations under FOIA). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1 The Honorable Alice R. Senechal, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

Daniel Cvijanovich v. Secret Service, (8th Cir. 2020).

Daniel Cvijanovich v. Secret Service (Daniel Cvijanovich v. Secret Service) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peltier v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
563 F.3d 754 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
Christopher W. Madel v. U.S. Department of Justice
784 F.3d 448 (Eighth Circuit, 2015)