Katz v. National Archives & Records Administration
1994 WL 560459, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14424, 862 F.Supp. 476 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A record is not an "agency record" under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) if the agency possesses it but lacks control due to restrictive conditions in a deed of gift, particularly after a break in the chain of government custody. Alternatively, even if such materials are agency records, their disclosure may be barred under FOIA's Exemption 6 if it would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy that outweighs the public interest.
Facts:
- On November 22, 1963, following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Navy personnel took autopsy photographs and x-rays.
- The Secret Service held custody of these materials from November 22, 1963, until April 26, 1965.
- On April 22, 1965, Senator Robert F. Kennedy authorized the release of the materials from the Secret Service into his custody.
- On April 26, 1965, the materials were transferred to Mrs. Evelyn Lincoln, who was not a government employee, for safekeeping at the National Archives building, with instructions that they not be released without Senator Kennedy's written permission.
- On October 29, 1966, the executors of President Kennedy's estate formally donated the autopsy materials to the United States via a "Deed of Gift."
- This Deed of Gift, accepted on behalf of the United States, stipulated specific restrictions on public access to the materials.
- The materials were kept in a locked footlocker, and the key was held by Senator Kennedy's secretary until the formal delivery to the Archives.
Procedural Posture:
- In January 1992, D. Mark Katz filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the National Archives and Records Administration seeking President Kennedy's autopsy records.
- The Archives denied the initial request and a subsequent appeal by Katz.
- In April 1992, Katz (plaintiff) filed suit against the Archives (defendant) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
- The Archives filed a motion to dismiss, which the court converted into a motion for summary judgment.
- Both parties then filed cross-motions for summary judgment, bringing the case before the court for a final decision on the law.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the National Archives and Records Administration improperly withhold agency records under the Freedom of Information Act when it denies access to President John F. Kennedy's autopsy photographs based on access restrictions in a deed of gift from the Kennedy family?
Opinions:
Majority - Flannery, District Judge.
No, the National Archives did not improperly withhold agency records because the autopsy photographs do not qualify as "agency records" under the Freedom of Information Act, and even if they did, they would be exempt from disclosure. For a document to be an "agency record" under FOIA, an agency must both possess and control it. Here, although the Archives physically possesses the photographs, it lacks control over them. The chain of government control was broken when the records were transferred to Mrs. Lincoln, a private citizen. The government subsequently regained possession, but not control, as its custody is governed entirely by the restrictive terms of the Deed of Gift from the Kennedy family. Citing Kissinger v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of Press, the court reasoned that FOIA cannot be used as a mechanism to reclaim records that may have been improperly removed from government custody. Furthermore, the court held in the alternative that even if the photos were agency records, they would be exempt from disclosure under FOIA's Exemption 6. This exemption protects against a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Balancing the public interest in disclosure against the Kennedy family's privacy interest, the court found that releasing the graphic and disturbing photographs would cause the family extreme anguish, constituting a clearly unwarranted privacy invasion that outweighs the public's interest.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the "control" element of the two-part test for determining what constitutes an "agency record" under FOIA. The court established that an agency's mere physical possession of a document is insufficient; the agency must also have the legal authority to freely dispose of it. This ruling solidifies the principle that private agreements, such as a deed of gift, can legally limit an agency's control and thereby remove government-originated records from FOIA's purview. The case serves as a key precedent for archives and other institutions holding materials acquired under specific restrictive conditions, affirming that such conditions can override FOIA's general disclosure requirements.
