Opinion ID: 1938008
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Intra-agency Memoranda

Text: Another prevalent exclusion from discovery is provided for in inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda. The theory behind this exemption is self-evident. A full and free exchange of discourse would be hampered if the preliminary thought processes of agency members were bared. Again, this exemption has not been regarded as all-exclusive, and saying that the document is an intra-agency memorandum does not make it so. In Environmental Protection Agency v. Mink, supra, 410 U.S. 73, 93 S.Ct. 827, 35 L.Ed. 2d 119, the leading case construing the FOIA's exemption for inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda, the Supreme Court distilled a commonsense, flexible rule from the legislative history and judicial opinions dealing with the privilege of executive agencies to withhold information from their adversaries, holding that the exemption authorized an agency to withhold `materials reflecting deliberative or policy-making processes' but required disclosure of `purely factual, investigative matters'. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc. v. I.T.O. Corp. of Baltimore, 508 F. 2d 945, 948 (4th Cir.1974) (citing Mink, supra, 410 U.S. at 89, 93 S.Ct. at 837, 35 L.Ed. 2d at 133). Thus, [i]nferences about the cause of an accident drawn from facts revealed by the investigation, though labeled as opinions or conclusions, are not exempt under the guise of deliberative or policy-making material. Moore-McCormack Lines, supra, 508 F. 2d at 949; see Robertson v. Butterfield, 498 F. 2d 1031 (D.C. Cir.1974), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Administrator, FAA v. Robertson, 422 U.S. 255, 95 S.Ct. 2140, 45 L.Ed. 2d 164 (1975) (intra-agency memorandum analyzing airline's operational and maintenance performance is discoverable). The Mink Court further held that the act should not be taken to embrace an equally wooden exemption permitting the withholding of factual material otherwise available on discovery merely because it was placed in a memorandum with matters of law, policy, or opinion. 410 U.S. at 91, 93 S.Ct. at 838, 35 L.Ed. 2d at 134. That approach continues to extend to the discovery of purely factual material appearing in those documents in a form that is severable without compromising the private remainder of the documents. Id. From these decisions we may distill the conclusion that we should expect practical, common-sense applications of rules of discovery that are familiar to trial courts in order to resolve most of the problems of confidentiality. But to the extent that the memorandum reflects the deliberative processes of the agency, a greater showing of need should be demonstrated by the applicant than a mere interest in the proceedings.