Case law

Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Hamburg Shirt Corporation

371 F.2d 740 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 15, 1966

The Company official who spoke at this event did not deny or qualify these remarks, and on a later day he stated that if the Union were successful “no one will ever know about the expansion plans or other plans.” … This card does not even have the fine print indicating an alternative use of the card in gaining an election, as did the card we recently held clear enough to be immune from individual impeachment because of subjective understanding

Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Aircoach Transport Association, Inc., Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company v. Aircoach Transport Association, Inc., Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Aircoach Transport Association, Inc., New York Central Railroad Company v. Aircoach Transport Association, Inc.

253 F.2d 877 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 25, 1958

Reduced rates for transportation incident to our huge defense establishment should not, unless the Act clearly so requires, be left altogether beyond the reach of the Commission's power to approve agreements with respect … The policy there declared, to be somewhat repetitious, is inter alia to encourage the establishment and maintenance of reasonable charges without "unfair or destructive competitive practices," all to the end of developing

Telematch, Inc. v. AGRI

45 F.4th 343 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 12, 2022

The memorandum explains when a photograph qualifies as geospatial information; it does not suggest that only photographs may so qualify. … Yet to establish the privacy interests at stake, USDA asserted that the public can link information in the requested records to individual farm owners.

Tavoulareas v. Tavoulareas

763 F.2d 1472 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 11, 1985

This test is disjunctive, and the panel opinion finds liability most clearly under . the “reckless disregard” standard. Tavoulareas v. Piro, 759 F.2d 90, 104 (D.C.Cir.1985). … To say that similarly slim support would immunize the statement that Mr.

Cobell v. Norton

213 F.R.D. 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 5, 2003

It should be noted, however, that the privilege is not absolute but qualified. … Moreover, that principle has been applied to bar such immunity claims by counsel for a fiduciary in the face of the beneficiaries’ demand for access.

NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V. v. Kingdom of Spain

112 F.4th 1088 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 16, 2024

It moved to dismiss the petitions on the ground that it enjoys sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et. seq. … It reasoned that “Derimen’s claim against [Moldova] was not an investment within the meaning of the ECT because Derimen, a [British Virgin Islands] entity, was not a qualifying investor.” Id. at 878.

Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration

706 F.3d 438 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 22, 2013

, acceptance of the drug by qualified experts, and widely available scientific evidence. … Petitioners clearly establish injury in fact here and Respondents do not seriously question it. As a veteran, Krawitz is entitled to free medical care from the VA system.

Edgar M. Skinner, Esther Skinner v. Aetna Life and Casualty

804 F.2d 148 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 31, 1986

Given the qualifying language, we conclude the appropriate test of the truth or falsity of Mr. … What the applicant in fact believed to be true is the determining factor in judging the truth or falsity of his answer, but only so far as that belief is not clearly contradicted by the factual knowledge on which it is based

Adams v. Rice

531 F.3d 936 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 18, 2008

In the Second Circuit’s view, the personnel records were inadequate to establish a “record” of a qualifying impairment under the second prong because they manifested only an impairment and not a resulting major life activity … because of the disability of such qualified individual.... ”).

Azadeh v. Gov't of the Islamic Republic of Iran

318 F. Supp. 3d 90 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 2018

. § 1604 (conferring a broad grant of immunity "except as provided in sections 1605 to 1607 of this chapter"). … Circuit's prior pronouncements establish. See Angellino , 688 F.3d at 773 .

Barker v. Conroy

282 F. Supp. 3d 346 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 11, 2017

Eagen , 309 F.Supp.2d 29 , 37 (D.D.C. 2004) (finding a "threat of future stigmatic injury is too speculative to qualify as an injury in fact"). Mr. … Thus, the Rulemaking Clause does not provide immunity from Mr. Barker's claims. 6 Mr.

Schneider, Rene' v. Kissinger, Henry A.

412 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 28, 2005

In the alternative, the court held that the complaint failed under Rule 12(b)(6) because (1) Kissinger was immune under the Westfall Act, Schneider, 310 F. … Supp. 2d. at 264-67, and (2) the United States was immune as sovereign, id. at 268-70.

Independent Bankers Ass'n of America v. Farm Credit Administration

164 F.3d 661 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 19, 1999

The agency also expanded the type of farm-related business activities that qualify for lending. … Further, the new regulations expand who' qualifies for rural home loans.

Ronald T. Butler, an Infant, by Booker T. Butler, His Father and Next Friend, and Booker T. Butler, Individually v. District of Columbia

417 F.2d 1150 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 15, 1969

Relying on the test established in Elgin 1 the judge held that the evidence adduced showed that the alleged negligent act was “a clearly discretionary matter” that had been determined by the school authorities and, therefore … , suit against the District of Columbia was barred by governmental immunity.

Pettaway v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Ass'n of America

644 F.3d 427 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 15, 2011

qualified by education, training, or experience.” … This language establishes that, under the Academy Plan, denial-of-benefits determinations by TIAA qualify for deferential review under the Supreme Court’s test in Firestone Tire & Rubber.

United States v. Maynard

615 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 6, 2010

The Court responded: [A] bus passenger clearly expects that his bag may be handled. … A search conducted without a warrant is ―per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment — subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.‖ Katz, 389 U.S. at 357.

United States v. Nicholas Slatten

865 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 4, 2017

Although we agree with Slatten that, at their joint trial, his co-defendant qualified as “an unavailable witness,” see United States v. … Immunity can indicate trustworthiness, particularly if the immunized statements do not cast blame or “divert attention” to another. See, e.g., Curro v.

Strather v. United States

13 App. D.C. 132 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 1898

Indeed, all the questions raised in the defense of the accused, were fully *145 and clearly defined, and fairly submitted to the jury. … This, we think, was clearly right.

Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior v. John J. King

308 F.2d 650 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 27, 1962

We think that case clearly distinguishable and that appellant is entitled to summary judgment. By authority of § 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended, 30 U.S. … “The Secretary [did] not claim * * * that his construction of the law and regulations is consistent with established practices of the Department.”

Stephanie Brown v. Allen Sessoms

774 F.3d 1016 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 19, 2014

. ¶ 14, we assume that the Committee recommended Brown for tenure only.  4 his various and sundry legal contributions” even though, according to Brown, she was “equally, if not more qualified … It also dismissed the claims against President Sessoms in his individual capacity because, as Brown conceded, he was shielded from liability by qualified immunity. See generally Bame v. Dillard, 637 F.3d 380, 384 (D.C.