Case law

Brown v. Dist. of Columbia

928 F.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 5, 2019

The regulation clearly outlines a burden-shifting framework, but it does not explicitly indicate that the burden of proving causation moves at any point. … The class plaintiffs clearly made their prima facie showing of causation here.

Enron Nigeria Power Holding, Ltd. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria

844 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 27, 2016

immunity in the PPA and had failed to show why enforcement should be denied on public policy grounds simply because an Enron-related entity is involved. … The public policy defense under Article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention is to be construed narrowly and is available only where an arbitration award “tends clearly to undermine the public interest, the public confidence

Carter/mondale Presidential Committee, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission

711 F.2d 279 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 1983

Certainly the FEC action challenged by the Committee — the calculation of the Committee's repayment obligation — qualifies under that definition. 8 Second, § 9041(b) also instructs that 5 U.S.C. §§ 701-706 establish the procedures … Rather, we emphasize the FEC’s administrative process because it is clearly designed to produce a definitive obligation in accordance with 26 U.S.C. § 9038 .

Hotel Association of Washington, D.C., Inc. v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union, Local 25, Afl-Cio

963 F.2d 388 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 28, 1992

In the present context, therefore, our inquiry is limited to determining whether any provision of, or established practice under, the CBA clearly conferred controlling effect upon Arbitrator Porter’s prior award. First. … The Employer claims that because “[t]he Porter Award interpreted the contract’s language [it] became embodied in the contract itself” and therefore “was immune from alteration or amendment by Arbitrator Cass in a subsequent

Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission

711 F.2d 224 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 17, 1983

Gulf Forwarding qualifies as a “freight forwarder” under 49 U.S.C. § 10102 (8) (Supp. IV 1980). . … Armored Carrier, accordingly, is of uncertain relevance to the case at bar, in which Gulf Forwarding clearly has primary access to the designated vehicles as preferential user.

Alfonso J. Torre v. Marion Barry, Jr., Individually and as Mayor of the District of Columbia

661 F.2d 1371 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 4, 1981

Although the Johnson case involved alleged discrimination by a private employer, Congress clearly expressed its intention also to allow state and local government employees to seek relief under either Title VII or the older … In the first place, there were no problems of sovereign immunity in the context of the Johnson case.

Pan American World Airways, Inc. And Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Sudflug Suddeutsche Fluggesellschaft Mbh, Intervenor. Pan American World Airways, Inc. And Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Robert T. Murphy, Sudflug Suddeutsche Fluggesellschaft Mbh, Intervenor

392 F.2d 483 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 31, 1968

felt confident that licensed direct air carriers such as Sudflug, whose qualifications are subject to continuous review by the Board, would, in their own self-interest, confine their dealings to financially responsible and qualified … Waterman Steamship Corp., 333 U.S. 103 , 68 S.Ct. 431 , 92 L.Ed. 568 (1948), which extended the Section 1006 immunity from judicial scrutiny to all C.A.B. orders subject to Presidential review.

Malta Irrigation District v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Continental Hydro Corporation, Intervenor

955 F.2d 59 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 7, 1992

In choosing among private applicants or among municipalities when, as is typically the case, no proposal is clearly superior, the Commission grants the permit to the first-filing applicant. … See generally Gregory Wilcox, 24 FERC 1161,317 (1983) (Uncompahgre I) (establishing rebuttable presumption that municipal preference is abused by coordinated permit surrender/license application filing). 6 Following the course

Doe v. District of Columbia

230 F.R.D. 47 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 9, 2005

First, the information requested is clearly relevant to plaintiffs claims. … and may help plaintiff establish those claims more readily, clearly, or convincingly.

National Treasury Employees Union v. Russell Vought

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 15, 2025

This email does not qualify as final agency action. … To conclude otherwise, the majority would have to establish that those factual findings were clearly erroneous, a step it pointedly does not take.

Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Greater Philadelphia Council of Churches, Intervenors

473 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 4, 1972

Both of these conclusions are clearly erroneous. … Without government control, the medium would be of little use because of the cacaphony of competing voices, none of which could be clearly and predictably heard. 115 Con *41 sequently, the Federal Radio Commission was established

Shook, Karen v. DC Fincl Respsble

132 F.3d 775 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 6, 1998

In response, it established what is popularly known as the Control Board. … It does not say that an order issued by the Control Board is immune from judicial review, but rather that the decision to issue such an order is not reviewable.

Razzoli, Kevin v. Fed Bur of Prisons

230 F.3d 371 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 7, 2000

We read the Privacy Act part of the complaint as having two dimensions, one clearly running afoul of Balisok, the other not so clearly. … The Court found that an attack on revocation of good time qualified as an attempt to secure such release.

Julie P. Miner v. Federal Communications Commission

663 F.2d 152 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 1, 1980

While finding “both applicants fully qualified to become licensees under the noncomparative or basic qualifying issues,” the ALJ held that “the public interest is best served by awarding the contested franchise to Crain. … Crain is .. . clearly to be preferred on the comparative criteria.” Id. at 899 .

Woodhull Freedom Found. v. United States

334 F. Supp. 3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 24, 2018

The burden for establishing the affirmative defense lies with the defendant, who must establish this fact by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. … At the pleading stage, this means that plaintiffs must "clearly ... allege facts demonstrating" each element of Article III standing. Id. (quoting Warth v.

Telesat Canada v. FCC

999 F.3d 707 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 4, 2021

The Ray Baum’s Act merely provided that the regulatory fees established under Section 9 of the Communications Act “shall remain in effect . . . until such time as the Commission adjusts or amends such fee under subsection … It clearly identified the basic governing statute as well as the Communications Act and its 2018 amendment. See Nat’l Tour Brokers Ass’n v. United States, 591 F.2d 896, 900 (D.C. Cir. 1978).

Department of the Army v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

890 F.2d 467 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 1, 1989

Each federal agency was mandated to establish criteria to “test for the use of illegal drugs by employees in sensitive positions.” Exec. … According to § 3.6, the Guidelines “establish exclusive standards for qualifying or certifying those laboratory personnel involved in urinalysis testing whose functions are prescribed by these Guidelines.” 53 Fed.Reg. 11,987

Media Matters for America v. Warren Paxton, Jr.

138 F.4th 563 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 30, 2025

At bottom, the plain meaning of the term “individual” clearly encompasses Paxton, who is a single human being. … Appellees clearly have standing to pursue this action.

Markowicz v. Nielsen

316 F. Supp. 3d 178 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 20, 2018

Accordingly, a disparity in qualifications, standing alone , can support an inference of discrimination only when the plaintiff is "markedly more qualified," "substantially more qualified," or "significantly better qualified … Geithner , on the other hand, found that such an inference was not clearly raised where the plaintiff held bachelor's and master's degrees in relevant fields and nineteen years of relevant experience, while the successful

United States v. Ferrara

54 F.3d 825 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 19, 1995

Therefore, in order to establish jurisdiction over New Mexico under the Government’s alternative theory, the State must qualify as a person within the meaning of the statute despite the Government’s contention that it is … Although a State could plausibly fall within the term “legal or commercial entity,” such a reading would be awkward and, at best, is not “clearly indicated.”