The Supreme Court today handed down its decisionin Taylor v. Sturgell, the first FOIA case to reach the high court in many years.
The case concerning the issue of claims preclusion, so its precedent is much more than just the FOIA. Taylor brought a lawsuit against the FAA for some blueprints of a plane made in the 1930's. Another individual, Herrick, that had a relationship of some type with Taylor had previously filed suit for the documents and lost. Additionally, Taylor used the same counsel that represented Herrick.
The District Court for the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that under the theory of "virtual representation," Taylor was precluded from bringing his claim for the documents. Taylor took the matter to the Supreme Court.
Justice Ginsburg, writing for an unanimous Court, initially found that the Court disproves of the theory of virtual representation, which had evolved in the various Circuit Courts. She wrote that there are six, and only six, exceptions to the rule against non-party preclusion and described each of them. The Court vacated the finding against Taylor and remanded it to the lower courts to find if one of the six exceptions against non-party preclusion fit the facts of the case. This exception was that a non party to an earlier case may be precluded if he is a representative or agent of a party who is bound by the prior adjudication. Thus, the lower courts must decide if Taylor, in pursuing his FOIA suit is acting as Herrick's agent. The Court stressed the guidelines this must be judged by and stated it was an affirmative defense that the government must prove, not that Taylor must show he is not Herrick's agent.
This is a very good opinion for FOIA requesters because they can now bring suits for material even if others they may have some relationship with brought an earlier suit. Of course, they may be bound by the prior decision if they have no new facts to allege, but they won't be precluded from initially bringing the claim.
Here's the AP's report on the decision.