Rosin v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

noting that the agency must “specify in detail which portions of the document are disclosable and which are allegedly exempt.” | granting summary judgment upon agency's representations "in candor and in good faith" that all responsive documents were made available to plaintiff | granting summary judgment upon agency’s representations “in candor and in good faith” that all responsive documents were made available to plaintiff | mandating a detailed description of each document withheld and a detailed justification for why the exemption applies for each document in its entirety rather than segregable portions thereof | requiring the government to create a public index listing privileged documents and providing explanations of the claim of privilege | articulating the Government’s burden to produce meticulous and specific documentation of its claimed justification for nondisclosure under 5 U.S.C. § 552 | requiring “a relatively detailed analysis [of alleged exempt status] in manageable segments” to allow a court to ensure that claimed exemptions “are adequately justified[.]” | requiring the government to create a public index listing privileged documents and providing explanations of the claim of privilege | articulating the burden to produce meticulous and specific documentation of the Department’s claimed justifications for non-disclosure under 5 U.S.C. § 552 | requiring agency to produce index specifying exemptions claimed and reasons for exemptions | agency must itemize and index documents to correlate justifications for refusal to disclose with portions of document claimed to be exempt from disclosure | “ ‘This lack of knowledge by the party seeking disclosure seriously distorts the traditional adversary nature of our legal system.”’ | " 'This lack of knowledge by the party seeking disclosure seriously distorts the traditional adversary nature of our legal system.' " | whether document was an "investment contract" under the Securities Acts properly decided by jury | whether document was an “investment contract” under the Securities Acts properly decided by jury | in camera review “may be very burdensome, and is necessarily conducted without benefit of criticism and illumination by a party with the actual interest in forcing disclosure” | “[C]ourts will simply no longer accept conclusory and generalized allegations of exemptions ... but will require a relatively detailed analysis in manageable segments.” | “[Cjourts will simply no longer accept conclusory and generalized allegations of exemptions ... but will require a relatively detailed analysis in manageable segments.” | in connection with charges under § 12(2) noting that "even if the transactions were isolated intrastate contracts made pursuant to private offers, the sales of securities were still subject to the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities acts.” | Conclusory affidavit by government in Freedom of Information Act case stating that documents sought were exempt from disclosure was insufficient and government must itemize and index documents withheld with detailed justification for exemption claims | outlining procedures for compiling record for review in FOIA cases | agency must itemize withheld documents and provide justifications for nondisclosure | prescribing indexing procedures in FOIA case | conclusory assertions of privilege “patently inadequate” | memorandum and order on reconsideration