Rogers v. Internal Revenue Service
822 F.3d 854
6th Cir.2016Background
- Rogers settled four IRS civil forfeiture actions on August 1, 2012 and signed a broad release that waived “any and all manner of claims … related to and/or in connection with or arising out of these Forfeiture Actions.”
- Four months later Rogers submitted a detailed FOIA request to the IRS for records related to the IRS investigation and forfeiture actions; the IRS denied the request and Rogers administratively appealed.
- Rogers sued under FOIA in August 2013. The parties agreed to a two-phase discovery/rolling production plan; the IRS provided monthly production reports and Rogers received some documents.
- The IRS did not plead the release as an affirmative defense in its answer or early filings, and moved for summary judgment more than a year after suit began, asserting the release barred Rogers’ FOIA claim.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the IRS, finding (1) Rogers’ FOIA claim fell within the broad release language and (2) the IRS had not forfeited the release defense by failing to plead it earlier. Rogers appealed.
- The Sixth Circuit majority affirmed; Judge Clay concurred in part (agreeing the release covers the FOIA claim) but dissented in part, arguing the IRS waived the defense by unreasonable delay and caused prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IRS forfeited affirmative defense of release by failing to plead it | Rogers: IRS waived the defense under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c) by not raising it earlier; delay prejudiced him | IRS: Court may permit a defense raised first at summary judgment if no surprise or prejudice | Court: No abuse of discretion in allowing defense; Rogers not shown to be prejudiced or surprised |
| Whether the settlement release estops IRS from asserting the release defense because it considered the FOIA request on the merits | Rogers: IRS’ conduct in processing/denying the FOIA request and appeals estops it from invoking the release | IRS: Settlement release remains a contract defense independent of administrative handling | Court: District court correctly rejected estoppel argument; no equitable bar to invoking the release |
| Whether the release’s scope covers FOIA claims | Rogers: FOIA claim not related to forfeiture actions or was unaccrued/unknown at signing | IRS: Release language is broad and includes any and all claims related to the forfeiture actions, including FOIA | Court: Release language unambiguously covers FOIA claim; Rogers (sophisticated, counsel-represented) bound by it |
| Whether mutual mistake or other contract defenses void the release (raised on appeal) | Rogers: Mutual mistake — parties didn’t intend to bar FOIA claims | IRS: No showing of fraud, duress, or mutual mistake; plain-language release controls | Court: Argument waived for failing to raise below; not reached on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Sushka, 117 F.3d 965 (6th Cir. 1997) (standard for abuse of discretion when allowing an affirmative defense raised late)
- Phelps v. McClellan, 30 F.3d 658 (6th Cir. 1994) (factors for prejudice when an affirmative defense is first raised at summary judgment)
- Stupak-Thrall v. Glickman, 346 F.3d 579 (6th Cir. 2003) (no prejudice where plaintiffs had fair opportunity to respond to late-raised defense)
- United States v. Seckinger, 397 U.S. 203 (1970) (federal common law governs releases and settlement agreements involving the United States)
- Nicklin v. Henderson, 352 F.3d 1077 (6th Cir. 2003) (general releases with clear language construed to cover claims)