Case law

Landry v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

204 F.3d 1125 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 3, 2000

See generally Note, The Military and State Secrets Privilege: Protection for the National Security or Immunity for the Executive? … OTS, 81 F.3d 195, 204 (D.C.Cir.1996), a profit does not establish its absence. *1139 Effects.

Johnson v. States

38 App. D.C. 347 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 4, 1912

Substantially the same result was achieved by the establishment of two degrees of murder as was effected by said act of January 15, 1897, permitting a jury to qualify its verdict; in other words, where, upon consideration … An intent to affect or repeal the latter by the enactment of the former ought clearly to appear, and will not be implied. Sullivan v. Goldman, present term, ante, 319.

Harlow v. Carroll

6 App. D.C. 128 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1895

No action of any kind, no criminal prosecution can be maintained against a defendant, when it is established that the words complained of were uttered by him as counsel in the course of a judicial inquiry.” … But these cases are clearly distinguishable from the present; and most, if not all of them, tend to support the rule laid down by Chief Justice Shaw. Indeed, the cases of White v. Nichols and Randall v.

Martin John Beattie v. United States

756 F.2d 91 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 31, 1984

In addition, waiver of sovereign immunity is not to be inferred lightly. But these cases have a cumulative effect which is persuasive. … This supplemental complaint clearly lacked venue.

Henry W. Segar v. William French Smith, Attorney General, Henry W. Segar, Cross-Appellants v. William French Smith, Attorney General

738 F.2d 1249 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1984

We would overturn the District Court’s evaluation of this evidence only if we were to find that evaluation clearly erroneous. … When Congress amended Title VII in 1972 to bring the federal government under its provisions, Congress evinced no intention to waive sovereign immunity as to interest awards.

United States v. Plunkett, Hugh O.

125 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 3, 1997

A defendant who qualifies for the safety valve also receives a two-level reduction in offense level under U.S.S.G. s 2D1.1(b)(4). … provides that, for purposes of Chapters Two and Three of the Sentenc- ing Guidelines, the district court should consider a broad range of conduct, whereas subsection (b) provides: "Factors in Chapters Four and Five that establish

Jason Payne v. Joseph Biden, Jr.

62 F.4th 598 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 21, 2023

He claims to have gained “natural immunity” against COVID-19 after having contracted and recovered from the disease. Compl. ¶ 7. Accordingly, Mr. … There is but one permissible conclusion given our well- established precedent guiding jurisdictional preclusion issues of this nature.

Albuquerque Indian Rights v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., in His Trust Capacity as Secretary of the Interior

930 F.2d 49 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 12, 1991

qualified for the OCM positions”). … I don’t have any time-in-grade as a GS-13, so I cannot qualify for a GS-14 position.

Lorelyn Penero Miller v. Warren Christopher, Secretary of State

96 F.3d 1467 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 8, 1996

Clearly the United States should not be in the business of conferring citizenship on people whose parentage is uncertain. See Gomez v. … her paternity by legitimation the age of twenty-one in order to qualify for citizenship.

Stella, Marie v. v. Mineta, Norman Y.

284 F.3d 135 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

The point was made even more clearly in O'Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308, 312 (1996), an age discrimination case. … Alternatively, the court might have deter- mined that no additional details were necessary to establish that appellant applied for promotions for which she was qualified and did not receive them.

Telecommunications Research & Action Center v. Federal Communications Commission

836 F.2d 1349 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 5, 1988

The 1982 statute clearly mandates minority and media ownership diversity preferences in any system of random selection. … . § 309 (i)(3). 26 In contrast, the decision of what kind of lottery system to establish in what circum *14 stances clearly lies within the discretion of the Commission.

American Hospital Association, an Illinois Non-Stock Corporation, Individually and on Behalf of Its Members v. Louis W. Sullivan, in His Capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services, American Hospital Association, an Illinois Non-Stock Corporation, Individually and on Behalf of Its Members v. Louis W. Sullivan, in His Official Capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services, American Hospital Association, an Illinois Non-Stock Corporation, Individually and on Behalf of Its Members v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., in His Official Capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services

938 F.2d 216 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 1991

In determining finally to follow the path toward which Lipsig and ALPO have directed us, we look to the rationale underlying the clearly erroneous standard established by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a). … clearly erroneous."

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of State

306 F. Supp. 3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 29, 2018

defined as agencies under FOIA to qualify as "inter-agency." … FOIA exempts "personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(6).

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Feld Entertainment, Inc.

659 F.3d 13 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 28, 2011

Read in context, however,  12 the district court’s statement is far from clearly erroneous. … qualified the organization is in evaluating the problem.”

Yeda Research & Development Co. v. Abbott GmbH & Co. KG

292 F.R.D. 97 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 2013

“Work product protection is not absolute but rather is a qualified immunity.” Westrick, 288 F.R.D. at 226 ; see also United States v. … The documents at issue were clearly prepared by Dr. Engelmann in his capacity as a consultant.

Dow Jones & Company, Inc. v. Department of Justice

917 F.2d 571 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 8, 1990

But — and this is the government’s problem — in order to qualify for the deliberative process privilege under Exemption 5, the government must demonstrate that the document is either inter-agency or intraagency in nature, … Tillamook County, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 304, 310 , 107 L.Ed.2d 237 (1989) (stating that “ ‘absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary,’ the words of the statute are conclusive”) (quoting Consumer Product

Schnitzer, Jeffrey v. White, Thomas E.

389 F.3d 200 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 23, 2004

The FTCA effects a broad waiver of sovereign immunity from lawsuits for money damages. … It has established a rule that ‘‘incarceration at the USDB is uniquely part of [a] military relationship such that it is ‘incident’ to TTT military service as established by Feres.’’ Walden, 840 F.2d at 774.

United States Telecom Ass'n v. Federal Communications Commission

825 F.3d 674 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 14, 2016

Applying the principles of statutory interpretation established in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. … telephone users cannot establish a connection to IP users.

Wrld Wde Mnrl v. Repub Kazakhstan

296 F.3d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 2, 2002

A foreign sover- eign will not be found to have waived its immunity unless it has clearly and unambiguously done so. See Aquamar S.A. v. … Cir. 1982) (holding that under the FSIA, Congress contemplated waivers of a "specific and explicit nature").12 There is no question that Kazakhstan clearly indicated its intent to waive its immunity for the claims

Henry Hayes v. United States

249 F.2d 516 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 31, 1957

sentence was inadvertent, as was the error in the present case, and that, if the error could not be corrected in the manner there used, no valid sentence could be imposed at all, with the result that a prisoner whose guilt was established … The Court continued: The Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner. See King v.