Case law

Hartman v. Duffey

19 F.3d 1459 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 5, 1994

Wick, 600 F.Supp. 361 (D.D.C.1984), an order establishing the remedial framework in 1988, Hartman v. … The imposition of this special hiring requirement clearly qualifies the 1992 order as an injunction appealable at this time so that the USIA can “effectually challenge” the order’s direct and, arguably, irreparable impact

DSE, Inc. v. United States

169 F.3d 21 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 12, 1999

which entities qualify as small business concerns, as well as to make particularized size assessments. … The SBA clearly erred. It is equally clear, however, that its error was harmless.

Walt Disney Company v. Carl Powell

897 F.2d 565 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 6, 1990

Powell claims that after this raid, he stopped selling the shirts and “confine[d] sales solely to clearly authorized merchandise.” Appellant’s Brief at 9. Disney subsequently brought suit. … where separate copyrights “have no separate economic value, whatever their artistic value, they must be considered part of [a] ... work for purposes of the copyright statute.” 9 Nimmer has similarly stated that “in order to qualify

George Smith, Jr. v. United States of America, Johnny B. Rozier, Jr. v. United States

418 F.2d 1120 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 1969

The record clearly establishes that the Government has not borne its burden of establishing that the appellant’s right to a speedy trial has not been abridged.” 12 Reading these cases together, I think they establish certain … The indictment is dismissed, and the defendant goes free, immune from further prosecution. For this reason it is not a remedy to be invoked lightly or thoughtlessly.

Grand Canyon Trust v. David Bernhardt

947 F.3d 94 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 17, 2020

But in none of those cases did we purport to alter the established clearly-erroneous standard for questions of fact. Accordingly, we apply that standard here. … Consider also Congress’s use of the word “unilateral” to describe the government’s action that qualifies the plaintiff for an award of attorney fees.

Mary Jane Ruderman Hirschey v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Long Lake Energy Corporation, Intervenor

777 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 15, 1985

We clearly rejected this claim in Hirschey II when we remanded the matter for initial determination by the Commission. Second, the petitioner submits the hours spent on her first unsuccessful appeal to this court. … As a financially qualified, prevailing party, Hirschey meets the requirements for a fee award pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A) (1982).

Public Service Company of Colorado v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Oxy USA Inc., Intervenors

91 F.3d 1478 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 2, 1996

By that standard, an ordinary property tax would qualify as a tax on production; the value of any asset is, after all, the present worth of the benefits that the asset is expected to produce— whether impounded in an established … An agency adjudication should be applied retroactively unless new law is replacing clearly defined old law and reasonable reliance interests must therefore be protected.

United States v. Dozier, Romulus

162 F.3d 120 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

To qualify for an adjustment, a defendant must "clearly" accept responsibility for his crime; it is not enough that he arguably do so. See Reid, 997 F.2d at 1580; United States v. McLean, 951 F.2d 1300, 1302 (D.C. … Because Dozier did not "clearly demonstrate acceptance of responsibility for his offense," he cannot establish that the court plainly erred in failing to explain its denial of an adjustment.

Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency

268 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 30, 2001

Alternatively, if the tribe fails to qualify, then EPA must likewise implement a federal program. … The Act clearly requires notice and comment in approving or disapproving any part of a state program. That includes the showing of adequate authority and thus jurisdiction.

Lancaster Symphony Orchestra v. National Labor Relations Board

822 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

Two other Restatement factors also suggest that the Lancaster Orchestra’s musicians qualify as employees. … First, the occupation of musician clearly requires a high degree of skill. Restatement factor four; cf.

Telecommunications Research & Action Center v. Federal Communications Commission

801 F.2d 501 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 19, 1986

Petitioners challenge the decision that section 315 does not apply to teletext on the ground that “[t]he Commission’s ruling is clearly at odds with the statute.” Brief for TRAC/MAP at 40. … We reach a similar conclusion with respect to the Commission’s efforts to establish as a matter of law that a candidate cannot “use” teletext within the meaning of section 315.

United States v. Hubbell, Webster L.

167 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 2, 1999

We are not confronted here with a situation where the money at issue is clearly untainted by possible underlying obstruction. … Hubbell's immunized act of production.

Neighborhood TV Co. v. Federal Communications Commission

742 F.2d 629 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 17, 1984

qualified applicants. … In the FCC’s first announcement of its interim processing procedures, the Commission clearly stated: because there are no rules for low power stations, it is necessary for each applicant, separately and individually, to establish

Adams v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

828 F.2d 24 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 1, 1987

This too was settled, with the defendants establishing a fund to provide plaintiffs reduced airfares for a five-year period. … Here superior plaintiffs clearly exist — both Laker itself and consumers of transatlantic air transportation.

International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Brock

816 F.2d 761 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 24, 1987

In the first seven years of the TRA program, established by the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, 8 not a single worker qualified for assistance, and in the following four years only a few thousand received benefits. S.Rep. … Congress acted to remedy this situation with “eased qualifying criteria and a streamlined petitioning process.” Id.

Northeast Hospital Corp. v. Sebelius

657 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 13, 2011

In sum, Congress has not clearly foreclosed the Secretary’s interpretation that M + C enrollees are entitled to benefits under Part A. … If the rule departs from established practice, we then examine its impact, if any, on the legal consequences of prior conduct.

Wood v. United States

128 F.2d 265 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 9, 1942

Both are made in open court during proceedings which are steps in those by which guilt or innocence eventually is established. Both are elicited by inquiry of a court. … When the plea is made it is not intended to waive and has nothing to do with waiving immunity to giving testimony. It is one thing to waive trial. It is another to waive immunity to testifying in trial.

American Clinical Laboratory v. Alex Azar, II

931 F.3d 1195 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 30, 2019

Because the gathering of data under PAMA is not “inextricably intertwined” with the establishment of payment rates, we lack a basis on which to infer that Congress, in eliminating jurisdiction over the latter, clearly meant … HHS did not clearly step so far outside the scope of the task that Congress gave it as to have acted ultra vires.

Church of Scientology of California v. Internal Revenue Service

792 F.2d 153 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 27, 1986

No one, it would seem, is better qualified than the Secretary to decide whether certain classes of information may be released in compliance with the Haskell amendment. … . § 6103 (b)(2) (emphasis added), means Congress established a “reformulation” requirement.

Friends of Animals v. Sally Jewell

824 F.3d 1033 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 3, 2016

The present case is clearly distinguishable from Feld Entertainment. … The Congressional enactment easily passes muster under established law. C.