Case law

United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp. v. Eichberg

14 F.2d 248 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 1, 1926

They have suggested the argument that it was so far put in place of the sovereign as to share the immunity of the sovereign from suit otherwise than as the sovereign allows. … In general, the United States cannot be sued for a tort; but its immunity does not extend to those that acted in its name.

McCurley v. National Savings & Trust Co.

258 F. 154 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 5, 1919

Appellant, if she would succeed here, must establish error affirmatively. Cliquot’s Champagne, 3 Wall. 114, 140 , 18 L. Ed. 116 ; Sturges v. Carter, 114 U. S. 511, 522 , 5 Sup. Ct. 1014, 29 L. … The question clearly referred to the Dickerson contract, for up to that time there was no mention of any other, and was proper cross-examination.

International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

418 F.2d 1191 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 22, 1969

stipulation alone could not clearly reach out to Wawasee, the text supplemented by the previous petition could. … If Timmons’ ballot cannot qualify under these standards, the Board must consider whether Kleinknight’s torn ballot is valid under the same standards.

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Independent Power Producers of New York, Inc., Intervenors

117 F.3d 1485 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 1997

The CDUC ordered CL&P to pay the municipal rate, as the statute clearly commands. … American Electric Power, 461 U.S. 402, 406 , 103 S.Ct. 1921, 1924 , 76 L.Ed.2d 22 (1983) (PURPA and implementing regulations “requirfe] a utility to purchase electricity from a [qualified facility] at a rate equal to the

Laurie L. Abraham v. Graphic Arts International Union

660 F.2d 811 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 14, 1981

term of the program was extended, the duties of the position were redefined by the union, in relevant part as follows: In the absence of the Project Coordinator, the Administrative Assistant will be authorized to carry out clearly … Accordingly, following the expiration of the Department of Labor contract on August 31, 1977, we entered into a new contract with the Department which more clearly met the needs of our program by providing a para professional

Zerilli v. Smith

656 F.2d 705 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 13, 1981

Compelling a reporter to disclose the identity of a source may significantly interfere with this news gathering ability; journalists frequently depend on informants to gather news, and confidentiality is often essential to establishing … Appellant’s one-page “Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment” clearly failed to satisfy the requirements of Local Rule l-9(d).

Gary L. Palmer v. Sharon Pratt Kelly, Mayor

17 F.3d 1490 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 18, 1994

post-trial motion for modification of the judgment, arguing that if the discrimination against Palmer ceased in mid-1984, then Palmer’s EEOC complaint, filed on December 9, 1985, was outside the 300-day limitations period established … This statement by the court clearly indicates that Palmer’s nonpromotion was the result of the Mayor’s continuing discriminatory policy.

Corbett Investment Co. v. Helvering

75 F.2d 525 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1935

Clearly, the payments • now in question were part of the purchase price which petitioner paid for the property it had acquired. … Therefore, to call any part of the ' payments made by them “interest” Would be pure fiction, and to treat the agreement between the grandsons and the widow as the establishment of an annuity would be to indulge -a form -of

United States v. Sherman Marshall

485 F.2d 1062 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 1973

quite clearly that the restrictions on parole in effect prior to the passage of the 1970 statute are now inoperative. … The impact of such repeal is qualified only by the savings provision, § 1103(a) of the 1970 law, which provided that “prosecutions for any violation of law prior to the [May 1, 1971] effective date . . . shall not be affected

Saleh v. Titan Corp.

580 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 11, 2009

The Supreme Court, reversing the Ninth Circuit, held that four DEA agents also named as defendants were immune from suit because of an exception to the FTCA waiver of sovereign immunity for actions in foreign countries.10 … “That merely establishes a necessary, not a sufficient, condition for the displacement of state law.” Id.

Smith v. District of Columbia

430 F.3d 450 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 6, 2005

In analyzing Smith’s retaliation claim, we use the burden-shifting framework established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). … Clearly, Smith engaged in a statutorily-protected activity when she filed her first EEOC complaint. See Holbrook v. Reno, 196 F.3d 255, 263 (D.C. Cir. 1999).

Maggard v. O'Connell

703 F.2d 1284 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 29, 1983

Maggard’s file do not establish that Mr. … Thus, to meet the requirements of Blankenship Test One he need only establish, under the Maggard v.

In Re SEALED MOTION

880 F.2d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 26, 1989

The facts of that case, however, are clearly distinguishable. … In this sui generis matter, however, since this court has been involved in this cause for a considerable period and is well qualified to weigh the continuing needs for grand jury secrecy as well as especially qualified to

Davis v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

734 F.3d 1161 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 1, 2013

To ignore the plain text would clearly be improper, particularly  18 because it appears in the same sentence that preserves the minimum benefits of the pre-1972 plan. … Airways’ long-established practice of deferring to the plan administrator of the Disability Plan for disability determinations. See id. 56.

United States v. Eddie J. Mathis

963 F.2d 399 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 15, 1992

Robbery by “Stealthy Seizure’’ The Supreme Court in Taylor established two principles for lower courts to follow when interpreting and applying § 924(e): The first, which we have already considered, is that Congress intended … The dependent clause — “whether against resistance or by sudden or stealthy seizure or snatching”— clearly modifies “force or violence.”

United States v. Javier Ballestas

795 F.3d 138 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 28, 2015

The court further held that the vessels apprehended on March 3rd and 11th qualified as stateless vessels “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” 46 U.S.C. § 70502(c)(1). … And with the extraterritorial reach of the conspiracy provision clearly established, we have no occasion to apply the Charming Betsy canon. Our decision in United States v. Ali is highly instructive.

C.F. Communications Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission

128 F.3d 735 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 31, 1997

We find that the Commission's interpretation of the word "premises" is so far removed from any established definition of that word that we must reject its interpretation as plainly erroneous. … For this reason, and because the Commission's interpretation of its rules was clearly erroneous, we vacate the Commission's Order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

United States v. Thomas L. Root

12 F.3d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1994

The foregoing actions clearly caused a significant disruption of governmental functions. … We cannot say that this process has not been significantly disrupted when the agency is led to dismiss possibly qualified applicants on the basis of forged documents.

Amalgamated Clothing Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

527 F.2d 803 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 8, 1975

We find the facts of this case squarely within the parameters established in Gissel and affirm both the finding of unfair labor practices and the bargaining order. … As the Court stated emphatically, “[W]e think it clearly inappropriate for the court below to make any contrary findings on its own.” Id.

Walter F. Costello v. Agency for International Development

843 F.2d 540 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 5, 1988

In this case, we believe that “[t]he words, structure, and history of the [Act] clearly reveal that Congress intended” to authorize the Board to award attorney fees to a FSO who prevails in an action under *543 section 610 … That Board, which did not exist when the 1946 act was enacted, is the best qualified body to adjudicate these cases.