Case law

Rieser v. District of Columbia

563 F.2d 462 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 15, 1977

Section 1332(a)(1) establishes federal diversity jurisdiction over suits between “citizens of different States.” … An actionable duty is found to exist where a special relationship has been established between the governmental unit and the plaintiff. For example, in Hicks v.

Iowaska Church of Healing v. Daniel Werfel

105 F.4th 402 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 21, 2024

The District Court did not clearly err in determining that the Church did not meet its burden here. … The case did not, however, establish the presumptive legality of Ayahuasca use by any purportedly religious group.

Deering Milliken, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

595 F.2d 685 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 6, 1978

Copies of census reports which have been so retained shall be immune from legal process, and shall not, without the consent of the individual or establishment concerned, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in … By order dated July 30, 1976 Judge Flannery established procedures for his tandem consideration of the two programs.

In re: Grand Jury Subpoena

571 F.3d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 9, 2009

Rose, 28 F.3d 181 (D.C.Cir.1994), should have qualified as protected speech. … But the Court has not interpreted the Clause to provide less protection than the text establishes.

United States v. Washington

62 F. App'x 351 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 21, 2003

The judge ruled that because the government had established that firearms were present and Washington had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it was clearly improbable those firearms were connected with … The judge concluded that the evidence had not established that Washington constructively possessed the firearms explaining that the proximity of the guns to the drugs was insufficient to establish dominion or control and

Cathelina Antolok v. United States

873 F.2d 369 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 28, 1989

The Act contains a number of exceptions, and Congress could clearly enact new ones. … claims, there is likewise no constitutional impediment to the reassertion of immunity to bar the further exercise of court jurisdiction over these claims.”

United States v. Joseph Smith

108 F.4th 872 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 23, 2024

The district court held that Smith established the first Duren prong but not the second or third. … The district court did not clearly or obviously err in allowing the agent to remain in the courtroom.

Wilson v. Libby

535 F.3d 697 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 12, 2008

The Supreme Court reiterated that a remedial statute need not provide full relief to the plaintiff to qualify as a “special factor” in Schweiker v. Chilicky, 487 U.S. 412 (1988). … Our Spagnola decision involved the comprehensive scheme established by the Civil Service Reform Act. 859 F.2d at 230.

Reverend Thomas B. Allen v. Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary of the Interior

495 F.2d 65 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 26, 1973

The propriety of that three-part test is well established, as Mr. … Taken together these decisions dictate that to pass muster under the Establishment Clause the law in question, first, must reflect a clearly secular legislative purpose, e. g., Epperson v.

Adams Telcom, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission United States of America, American Pcs, L.P., Intervenors

38 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 6, 1995

Establishment of Procedures to Provide a Preference to Applicants Proposing an Allocation for New Services (“Preference Procedures Report”), 6 F.C.C.R. 3488 (1991). … If, after receiving comments, the Commission wishes to grant a pioneer’s preference, it will do so at the time it adopts the new rules (if any) that are necessary to establish the new service.

Henry W. Jackson v. United States

353 F.2d 862 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 4, 1965

While the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure establish no particular test for review, Rule 57(b), Fed.R.Crim.P., authorizes courts, “if no procedure is specifically prescribed by rule, * * * [to] proceed in any lawful manner … One jury commissioner testified that he did not know a single Negro who qualified to vote under the state constitution.

Pottsville Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission

98 F.2d 288 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 9, 1938

The examiner’s findings of fact were that the corporation was in all respects financially qualified to operate the proposed' station ; that there was need of a local daytime station at Pottsville; that its establishment would … This clearly appears from the Act itself as well as from its interpretation by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Insuranshares Corporation v.

GSS Group Ltd. v. National Port Authority of Liberia

822 F.3d 598 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 17, 2016

It noted that GSS had to overcome the presumption that “government instrumentalities established as juridical entities distinct and independent from their sovereign”—like the Port Authority—“should normally be treated as … requirement when it ordered the contract’s cancellation; the only difference between its position and the Commission’s earlier position was that the National Transitional Government also concluded that the contract did not qualify

Seatrain Lines, Inc. v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, Pacific Far East Lines, Inc., Intervenor

460 F.2d 932 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 23, 1972

The direct and destructive impact upon competition which may result from a merger renders it the kind of arrangement as to which expert scrutiny most clearly is to be desired. … of the FMC to approve are beyond the immunity offered by the Shipping Act as well.

Professional Drivers Council, John Torbet, and David Gaibis v. Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety, and United States of America

706 F.2d 1216 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 27, 1983

In this instance the Secretary clearly stated his reasons for denying the petition. … We will not venture into the realm of policy-making in the area of hours-of-service regulations as that is clearly beyond our expertise.

United States v. Jeffrey Williamson

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 12, 2025

United States, 431 U.S. 651, 662 (1977); the denial of a motion asserting Speech and Debate immunity, Helstoski v. … The order plainly involves no claimed immunity from trial. See United States v. Cisneros, 169 F.3d 763, 767–69 (D.C.

United States v. Curtis Jenkins

50 F.4th 1185 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 11, 2022

Another is a judicial decision that retroactively establishes legal error at sentencing. … At the time, all three convictions arguably qualified as predicate offenses to trigger ACCA.

The Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. National Security Agency

610 F.2d 824 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 15, 1979

It follows that Section 6 is a statute qualifying under Exemption 3. 40 Even the most casual reading of Section 6 suggests, however, a potential for unduly broad construction. … Exemption 1, 5 U.S.C. § 553 (b)(1) (1976), immunizes from compulsory disclosure information that is (A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national

Lawson v. United States

176 F.2d 49 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 13, 1949

“It is fully established by reiterated holdings of the Supreme Court that the right of free speech is not absolute but must yield to national interests justifiably thought to be of larger importance. … essential to avert the anticipated evil, without defining the statement.” 6 Lawson and Trumbo make various other attacks on the authority of the Committee, the pertinency of the questions aske'd and the failure to provide immunity

Conset Corporation and Stanley Zimmerman v. Community Services Administration

655 F.2d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 5, 1981

The facts in Old Dominion clearly demonstrate both of the elements necessary to show a due process violation of a protected liberty interest. … CSA originally was established in 1964 as the Office of Economic Opportunity under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. CSA succeeded the OEO in 1975.