Case law

Flaherty v. Ross

373 F. Supp. 3d 97 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 9, 2019

"Absent a waiver of sovereign immunity, the Federal Government is immune from suit." Loeffler v. Frank , 486 U.S. 549 , 554, 108 S.Ct. 1965 , 100 L.Ed.2d 549 (1988). … In arguing that the Council does qualify as an "agency" under § 702, Plaintiffs appear to overstate the Council's authority under the MSA.

Secretary of Labor v. Industrial TurnAround Corporation

138 F.4th 1339 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 3, 2025

Unlike a denial of qualified immunity — for which collateral review is “essential” because “the nub of qualified immunity is the need  10 to induce officials to show reasonable initiative when … the relevant law is not clearly established” — the interest affected by the district court’s decision was “the avoidance of litigation for its own sake[.]”

Eileen M. Degraff v. District of Columbia

120 F.3d 298 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 8, 1997

Moreover, police officers are protected by a qualified immunity in section 1983 cases when they “perform! … ] discretionary functions ... insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established ... rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Han Kim and Yong Seok Kim v. Democratic People's Republic of Korea

774 F.3d 1044 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 23, 2014

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) generally immunizes foreign governments from suit in the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1604. Truly heinous acts, however, can negate that immunity. … If proven with admissible evidence, that treatment would clearly constitute torture within the TVPA’s meaning.

Cruise Connections Charter Management 1, LP v. Attorney General of Canada

600 F.3d 661 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 6, 2010

Although acknowledging that RCMP, as an “agency or instrumentality” of the federal government of Canada, 28 U.S.C. § 1603(b), generally enjoys immunity from suit in U.S. courts under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ( … But even setting aside our long-established rule that we rarely consider contentions made for the first time at oral argument, see Rempfer v. Sharfstein, 583 F.3d 860, 867 n.6 (D.C.

Gregory A. Lucas v. Benny O. Hodges, Administrator, Lorton Reformatory

730 F.2d 1493 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 23, 1984

The Supreme Court has shaped a qualified immunity defense that is based on “the objective reasonableness of an official’s conduct, as measured by reference to clearly established law.” Harlow v. … established at the time of the challenged conduct so as to defeat a claim of qualified immunity.

Tara Ann Jungquist v. Sheikh Sultan Bin Khalifa Al Nahyan

115 F.3d 1020 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 12, 1997

But, as the Supreme Court has explained, “Johnson held, simply, that determinations of evidentiary sufficiency at summary judgment are not immediately appealable merely because they happen to arise in a qualified-immunity … Appellants fail to demonstrate that this finding is clearly erroneous. See Foremost-McKesson, 905 F.2d at 440 n. 3, 449.

In Re: Sealed Case No. 99-3091(office of Independent Counsel Contempt Proceeding)

192 F.3d 995 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 9, 1999

It is well established that “[t]he United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued ..., and the terms of its consent to be sued in any court define that court’s jurisdiction to entertain the … And even a discussion of “strategy and direction of the investigation” could include references to not yet delivered but clearly anticipated testimony. See Lance, 610 F.2d at 216 -17 and n. 4.

Doe v. McMillan

566 F.2d 713 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 29, 1977

We now consider *54 whether, in addition, these appellees were protected by a qualified immunity. … This court has held as well that such a qualified immunity is available to protect federal officers whose acts, while in good faith, are outside the bounds protected by an absolute official immunity. Apton v.

Jose Vasquez v. DC

110 F.4th 282 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 9, 2024

“An official sued under [Section 1983] is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct … Vasquez alleges, and do not aid his attempt to clear qualified immunity’s high bar.

Klint L. Mowrer v. DOT

14 F.4th 723 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 24, 2021

Together, these provisions speak clearly enough to waive federal sovereign immunity. … Take qualified immunity, which “springs from the same root considerations that generated the doctrine of sovereign immunity.” Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 239 (1974).

United States v. Luis Munoz Miranda

780 F.3d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 20, 2015

who has been punished by the local law of the tribe”); 28 U.S.C. § 1604 (Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act). … Congress established no such regime under the MDLEA, and the vessels  24 in this case thus qualify as “without nationality” even though they were located in Colombian waters when seized.

David Schermerhorn v. State of Israel

876 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 1, 2017

Treating each sentence in isolation, as Plaintiffs urge, we could read section 1605A(a)(1) as establishing a seemingly unqualified abrogation of sovereign immunity and section 1605A(a)(2) as providing only when cases must … The FSIA is premised on “a presumption of foreign sovereign immunity” qualified only by a small number of “discrete and limited exceptions.” Price v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 294 F.3d 82, 87-88 (D.C.

Arif H. Mosrie v. Marion S. Barry, Jr.

718 F.2d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 7, 1983

To answer “this threshold immunity question,” a court “may determine, not only the currently applicable law, but whether that law was clearly established at the time” of the challenged action. Id. … In this case the threshold immunity question is whether it was clearly established in 1979 that appellant had a liberty interest of which appellees deprived him.

Hobson v. Wilson

737 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 8, 1984

Fitzgerald and Defendants’ Qualified Immunity............... 242 A. Qualified Immunity and the Harlow Standard......................... 242 B. … Qualified Immunity and the Harlow Standard Prior to Harlow , qualified immunity had both subjective and objective elements.

White v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.

303 F. Supp. 3d 5 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 31, 2018

There are two circumstances in which a private individual can sue a state despite Eleventh Amendment immunity: (1) where a state consents to suit, thus waiving its immunity; or (2) where Congress abrogates the immunity by … . § 1983 CLAIM It is well established that neither states nor official state actors qualify as "persons" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Will v. Mich.

Gray, William v. Poole, Theisha

243 F.3d 572 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 27, 2001

Most officials receive only qualified immunity, which protects them from liability for the performance of discretionary func- tions when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … At most, this would make Robinson "responsible for the decision to initiate or continue [the] proceeding"--a function Butz clearly held to be within the scope of absolute immunity.

Constructores Civiles De Centroamerica, S. A. (Concica) v. John Hannah

459 F.2d 1183 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 14, 1972

First, it asserts that AID/Washington used improper standards in determining whether CONCICA was a qualified bidder. … Sovereign Immunity We may dispense with appellees’ assertion that sovereign immunity is a bar to the instant suit by citing Estrada v.

Osseiran v. International Finance Corp.

552 F.3d 836 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 13, 2009

Although the waiver provision contained no exceptions for different types of suit, the court read a qualifier into it. … Instead, International Finance contends that waiver of immunity for promissory estoppel and breach of confidentiality suits would not advance its interests because Osseiran has not established the essential elements of his

United States v. Slough

641 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 22, 2011

Thus, only if the government on remand fails to establish by a preponderance that Frost would have written the journal or testified in the absence of exposure to defendants’ immunized statements would use of the journal and … But defendants’ proposed rule clearly would entangle the court in what has hitherto normally been internal prosecutorial decision-making.