Case law

Firestone v. Fed. Ret. Thrift Inv. Bd.

375 F. Supp. 3d 102 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 25, 2019

Wang's motion challenges her equitable estoppel claim, and she clearly anticipated the same in FRTIB's and TSP's motion. Despite that awareness, the Court lacks Mrs. … Firestone's standing or FRTIB's and TSP's sovereign immunity, nor does it need to evaluate her claims under Rule 12(b)(6). B.

Duesing v. Udall

350 F.2d 748 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 30, 1965

The lawsuits sought to establish the invalidity of the decision of the Secretary of the Interior closing the southern half of the Kenai National Moose Range in Alaska for oil and gas leasing, in consequence of which appellants … The hearing was held pursuant to notice in the Federal Register of October 11, 1957 ( 22 F.R. 8088 ), which clearly stated that all or part of the Alaska wildlife areas might be closed to mineral leasing.

United States v. Gregory McFayden

865 F.2d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 24, 1989

The Fourth Amendment Standard The Supreme Court has clearly established that “stopping an automobile and detaining its occupants constitutes a ‘seizure’ ” within the meaning of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, “even … In Prouse , the Court determined that, “[i]n terms of actually discovering unlicensed drivers or deterring them from driving, the spot check does not appear sufficiently productive to qualify as a reasonable law enforcement

CREW v. DOJ

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 19, 2022

In light of the sitting President’s immunity from criminal prosecution, Mueller declined to determine whether President Trump’s potentially obstructive conduct constituted a crime. … And those sorts of early-stage discussions would ordinarily qualify for protection under the deliberative- process privilege.

Fall v. United States

49 F.2d 506 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 6, 1931

What the accused is entitled to is a trial by an impartial jury duly qualified and impaneled to sit thereon. That the appellant had such a jury is not denied. … They were all evidentiary facts tending to establish the relations between Pall and Sinclair.

Standard Rate and Data Service, Inc. v. United States Postal Service

584 F.2d 473 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 14, 1978

by the case at bar, in which we are called upon to review a determination that certain criteria must be met to qualify for second-class mailing privileges. … Until 1974, the regulation was published in the Code of Federal Regulations. 39 C.F.R. § 132.2 (1974) provided, in pertinent part: “(a) What may qualify — (1) Mailable publications.

United States v. Robert J. Scios A/K/A Robert Schwartz

590 F.2d 956 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 27, 1978

Massa consulted a lawyer in New York, who advised him to say nothing until he was granted immunity. The prosecutor in charge of the investigation refused to offer Massa immunity by letter. … The relevance of Johnson to this case is established beyond peradventure by Brown v. Illinois.

Hispanic Information & Telecommunications Network, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Daytona Beach Community College, Intervenor

865 F.2d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 24, 1989

All qualified local applicants filing for licenses during that year, as well as all qualified local entities whose applications were pending as of the start of that period, would be given priority, and mutually ex-elusive … The statute does not preclude the FCC from establishing threshold standards to identify qualified applicants and excluding those applicants who plainly fail to meet the standards.

Rice v. United States

245 F.R.D. 3 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 27, 2007

. § 552a(b)(2), FOIA Exemption Six provides that its disclosure requirements do not apply to “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal … Even assuming arguendo that non-peeuniary *7 harm could qualify as actual damages, plaintiffs’ declarations (their only evidence of actual damages) 4 fall short.

Colby v. Riggs Nat. Bank

92 F.2d 183 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 31, 1937

Section 6 (D.C.Code 1929, T. 11, § 36) marks a material departure from established law. … immune from liability in a case in which it accepted the personal check of the fiduciary, except where it acted in bad faith or had knowledge that the fiduciary was committing a breach.

Esquire, Inc. v. Barbara A. Ringer

591 F.2d 796 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 22, 1978

In fact, under the Register’s interpretation of § 202.10(c), the dancing figures considered in Mazer would clearly be copyrightable. … In general, the Copyright Act “establishes a *806 wide range of selection within which discretion must be exercised by the Register in determining what he has no power to accept.” Bouve v.

Grant Anthony v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of H.H.S.

848 F.2d 1278 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 1988

Despite that fact, the Court said that “it seems clearly to have been the intent of Congress to permit [the award of fees pen-dente lite ] only to a party who has established his entitlement to some relief on the merits of … Just as the plaintiffs in Hanrahan had not yet established the validity of their civil rights claims, Anthony has not yet established the validity of his. He has won the right to have his STRIDE claims investigated.

Mellon v. Brewer

18 F.2d 168 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 7, 1927

The communication then recites that in March of 1924 the House of Representatives passed a resolution authorizing the appointment of a committee to investigate the Brewer charges, and that “the discussion in Congress clearly … Naturally he presented only such information and only such ‘witnesses as in his opinion would tend to establish his charges.

Teneyck, Lillie v. Omni Shoreham Hotel

365 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 7, 2004

Stella clearly held that a Title VII plaintiff is not required to show that she was rejected in favor of someone outside her protected class. 284 F.3d at 145. … To establish a prima facie case under the ADEA, for a claim involving a failure to hire, the plaintiff must demon- strate that (1) she is a member of the protected class (i.e., over 40 years of age); (2) she was qualified

The Honorable Keith M. Lundin v. L. Ralph Mecham

980 F.2d 1450 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 3, 1993

Moreover, the Government bears the burden of establishing that its position was substantially justified. Jones v. Lujan, 887 F.2d 1096, 1098 (D.C.Cir.1989). … This conclusion disposes of the Director's claim that the District Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because sovereign immunity had not been waived.

Price v. Barry

53 F.3d 369 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 9, 1995

The use of the word "may" clearly marks the Board's decision as discretionary. See United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 706 , 103 S.Ct. 2132, 2149 , 76 L.Ed.2d 236 (1983). … The statute also grants the Board the power to qualify a prisoner's release on whatever "terms and conditions" the Board sees fit to impose.

Harold R. Mitchell v. United States

293 F.2d 161 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 19, 1961

before us an affidavit of a Captain of the Metropolitan Police Department, the officer who conducted the lineup at which the identification in question was made, that Ellis positively identified the other person, without qualifying … If the Captain’s affidavit is true appellant has been convicted with the material aid of testimony offered by the government, established to be false by a responsible public official directly concerned with the investigation

Singh v. George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences

508 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 4, 2007

“Otherwise qualified.” … Second, the court noted that “a mere diagnosis [of an impairment] is not sufficient to establish a disability under the ADA,” id.

Washington Post Company v. United States Department of Justice

863 F.2d 96 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 16, 1988

In December 1982, Lilly’s board of directors established a special committee of outside directors which, with the help of an outside law firm, began an investigation. … Information relating to business judgments and relationships does not qualify for exemption. See id. at 575 . This is so even if disclosure might tarnish someone’s professional reputation. See Cohen v.

Public Citizen, Inc. v. Office of Management & Budget

598 F.3d 865 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 11, 2010

It does not establish that agencies would comply, and it certainly does not establish that pieces of legislation would "come to [OMB]" before going to Congress. … Yet, while the NLRB strategies clearly affected outsiders — and were presumably intended to influence the other parties' behavior — we said that they merely "establish[ed] rules and practices for agency personnel, and Mr.