|
|
|
|
Please
Redistribute
December 7, 2005
Mimi Hull, President
ASSOCIATION OF U S WEST RETIREES
(AUSWR)
AUSWR Board Members and General
members
This is a follow-up to my
August 18, 2005 update report
regarding the Hull v. Department
of Labor (Freedom of
Information Act - FOIA) lawsuit
filed in the Denver Federal Court.
The update on August 18 reported we
filed some legal papers on July
29, again challenging the DOL's
position and asking Denver Federal
Chief Judge Babcock to inspect
those papers and force the DOL
to release those papers. Also the
update on August 18 reported that in
early August, the United States
Attorney defending the DOL's
actions told us "the DOL just
found some more papers and documents
that the DOL has decided to release
to us." The U.S.
Attorney told us he was informed
that the papers were found, all of a
sudden, on the hard drive of the
computer that the DOL investigator
had been using. So, he told
us that, eventually, the DOL will
send us those "just found" papers.
But, that never
happened! Those newly discovered
papers were never given to either
Ms. Hull or me. We never heard
anything more from either the DOL or
the United States Attorney.
On December 2, 2005, Chief
Judge Babcock entered a ruling
deciding the central dispute between
the parties, i.e., whether the
DOL met its burden contending that
certain documents can be withheld
from Ms. Hull and AUSWR pursuant to
certain Exemptions applicable to
the Freedom of Information Act. In
short, Chief Judge Babcock ruled
that the DOL had to turn
over certain withheld documents to
the Court so that Judge Babcock
could himself examine the papers and
then decide whether FOIA required
the papers be disclosed to Ms. Hull
and AUSWR. You can read Chief Judge
Babcock's December 2, 2005
Order at this URL:
http://www.uswestretiree.org/Order120205.pdf
It is a very well reasoned and
colorful 22 page ruling.
Chief Judge Babcock ruled
that the DOL had not met its burden
to justify withholding eleven
documents under FOIA Exemption 5 and
three Service Contracts under FOIA
Exemption 4. He further explained
that he accepted Ms. Hull's argument
that she was entitled to in
camera review of the withheld
documents because of the DOL's bad
faith throughout the litigation in
response to her FOIA request. He
said, "Hull argues, cogently,
that a citizen should not have to
file a lawsuit to make a federal
agency comply with the
law.". . . "Hull's extensive list of
agency conduct suggests a pattern of
obstructing Hull's FOIA request and
indicates that the DOL was not
behaving in the spirit of FOIA,
providing information in an open
fashion to enable citizens to hold
their government accountable."
Of course, all of the
withheld papers concern the DOL's
'investigation' of the Qwest Pension
Plan. The next step will be for the
DOL to give withheld papers to Chief
Judge Babcock and upon his review,
he will decide whether those papers
should be delivered to Ms. Hull and
the AUSWR organization. I will let
you what develops next.
Meanwhile, to learn more, you
should visit the "Legal
Developments" page at the AUSWR
website http://www.uswestretiree.org/legal2.htm
and under the heading "Freedom
of Information Act - Hull v. DOL" view
all of the updates, the
Complaint and other legal papers
that have been posted.
|