Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.
- Decided
- June 9, 1980
- Docket
- 79-521
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,564 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that information obtained in response to a FOIA request was a “public disclosure” for purposes of the Consumer Product Safety Act — United States Ex Rel. Hixson v. Health Management Systems, Inc. (2009)
- noting that “[a]bsent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, [statutory] language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive” — Air Line Pilots Association, International, Cross v. United Air Lines, Inc., Cross-Appellee (1986)
- stating that "the starting point for interpreting a statute is the language of the statute itself" — Sprague v. Sprague (2012)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question presented is whether § 6 (b)(1) of the Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U. S. C. § 2055 (b)(1), governs the disclosure of records by the Consumer Product Safety Commission pursuant tó a request under the Freedom of Information Act. We granted certiorari to review a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit because of the importance of the question and because of a conflict in the Circuits. [1]
Statutes cited
- 15 U.S.C. § 2055
- 15 U.S.C. § 2051
- 15 U.S.C. § 2053
- 15 U.S.C. § 2057
- 5 U.S.C. § 552
- 15 U.S.C. § 2078
- 49 U.S.C. § 1504
- 42 U.S.C. § 2161
Cite this
Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 U.S. 102 (1980)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.