Case law

CREW v. DOJ

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 31, 2023

The use of such a modifier in Exemption 4 “clearly marks the provision’s boundaries.” Milner, 562 U.S. at 569. … They do not treat such consequences alone as sufficient to establish that information is “commercial” under Exemption 4.

Olds v. Rollins College

173 F.2d 639 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 3, 1949

His desire was to establish a center of art appreciation, rather than to supplement an inadequate art department. … Olds, supra, to be the establishment of an art center on the campus of a southern university which is firmly established financially in an apparently permanent environment of education and culture.

Edward A. Baker, D/B/A Union City Radio v. Federal Communications Commission, Land O'Lakes Broadcasting Corporation, Intervenor

834 F.2d 181 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 1, 1987

As previously stated, the FCC’s decision in Santee Cooper clearly held that the issuance of a construction permit is the triggering event for purposes of section 307(b)’s attribution rules. … Until overruled or qualified, the Santee Cooper precedent, in its current shape, binds the Commission.

United States v. Peter D. Van Oosterhout

96 F.3d 1491 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 8, 1996

River Capital was established under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 15 U.S.C. §§ 681 -687m (1988), as a Small Business Investment Corporation (SBIC). … It is SBA’s offering circular which preceded the issuance of the bonds, and not the regulations, that tells us quite clearly when SBA became liable to Chemical.

Drivers, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local No. 71 v. National Labor Relations Board

553 F.2d 1368 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 31, 1977

Fairly read, the cases establish, first, that in certain circumstances — not present here — the Board in its discretion will allow electoral participation by a nonqualifying union, and, second, that a reviewing court will … unions, 32 and would, in particular, clothe the Union with a coercive power under circumstances in which Congress clearly did not intend it to exist.

Seatrain International, S.A. v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, Japan/korea-Atlantic and Gulf Freight Conference, Intervenor

598 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 12, 1979

United States, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 293 , 299, 211 F.2d 51, 57 (1954), this court held that the FMC can exercise its statutory power to grant antitrust immunity to shipping conferences only after scrutiniz[ing] the agreement to … The relationship between the terms of service considered by JKAG and those offered by TPF was clearly relevant to any estimate of the benefits likely from the proposed action.

Barley v. Gittings

15 App. D.C. 427 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 5, 1899

And again, it would confer upon natural persons and corporations, doing a large part, or even all of their business in the District, but having “'a legal residence or location” elsewhere, a privilege and immunity not enjoyed … Clearly, as to the corporation itself and to each other, they were not stockholders in any legal sense.

Matthew A. Goldstein, PLLC v. United States Department of State

851 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 14, 2017

The State Department has established an optional process under the ITAR for requesting an official determination on whether a particular activity constitutes brokering. See id. … as plaintiffs [because] the regulation is directed at them in particular; it requires them to make significant changes in their everyday business practices; if they fail to observe the [agency]’s rule[,] they are quite clearly

Am. Ctr. for Law & Justice v. U.S. Dep't of State

330 F. Supp. 3d 293 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 10, 2018

"The agency bears the burden to establish the applicability of a claimed exemption to any records or portions of records it seeks to withhold." Id. … Here, the redacted communication was authored by Meehan, an NSC official who appears to qualify as an immediate White House adviser.

USPS v. PRC

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 27, 2011

The Commission concluded, however, that the rate request, as submitted, did not otherwise qualify for section 201(d)(1)(E)’s narrow exception to the statutory rate cap. … “The words do not speak clearly and unambiguously for themselves.

United States v. Lacy Stock, A/K/A Russell Rogers

948 F.2d 1299 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 22, 1991

To be sure, Stock’s statement was not necessary to the government’s establishing the crime of possession with intent to distribute. … It is not disturbing that the error prevented defense counsel from establishing whether Stock actually made the statement.

American Smelting and Refining Company v. Federal Power Commission, (Two Cases), Tucson Gas & Electriccompany, Intervenors. San Diego Gas and Electric Company v. Federal Power Commission, Johns-Manville Products Corp., Intervenors. Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. Federal Power Commission, General Motors Corporation, Intervenors. Southern California Gas Company v. Federal Power Commission, General Motors Corporation, Intervenors. Southern California Edison Company v. Federal Power Commission, Tucson Gas and Electric Co., Intervenors. American Smelting and Refining Company v. Federal Power Commission, El Paso Natural Gas Co. City of Willcox and Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Federal Power Commission, American Smelting and Refining Co. Etal., Intervenors. Southern Union Gas Company v. Federal Power Commission, American Smelting and Refining Co., Etal. Intervenors. Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles v. Federal Power Commission, Shell Oil Company, Intervenors

494 F.2d 925 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 25, 1974

The question decided in International Paper was whether the Commission's adoption of a curtailment plan would ipso facto immunize the pipe line from liability for breach of service contracts. … The Commission's concern for human needs customers is clearly unnecessary.

Certified Color Manufacturers Association v. F. David Mathews, Secretary of the Department of Hew

543 F.2d 284 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 1976

any, of such additive in the diet of man or animals, taking into account the same or any chemically or pharmacologically related substance or substances in such diet; (iii) safety factors which, in the opinion of experts qualified … Such order may reinstate a terminated provisional listing, or increase or dispense with a previously established temporary tolerance limitation, or make less restrictive any other limitation established by him under paragraph

Worthington Compressors, Inc. v. Costle

662 F.2d 45 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 20, 1981

In Chrysler Corp. the Supreme Court refused to decide whether the Trade Secrets Act is such a withholding statute. 60 In 1976 Congress narrowed Exemption 3, making it more difficult for statutes to qualify as withholding … A statute qualifies under Exemption 3 only if it “(A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) established particular criteria for withholding or

Friedman v. Decatur Corporation

135 F.2d 812 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 12, 1943

This was clearly sufficient to bring the case within the exception to the general rule, because of excuse resulting from an anticipatory breach. … If you find that the plaintiff has established these facts by a fair preponderance of the evidence, you will proceed to the next question, which I shall take up with you.

Sanford v. United States

586 F.3d 28 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 13, 2009

I, § 8, cl. 14, Congress established a military justice system that includes three types of courts-martial: summary, special, and general. See 10 U.S.C. § 816. … martial judgment on collateral review,” id., the court held that “in light of Councilman’s point that non-habeas review is if anything more deferential than habeas review of military judgments, a military court’s judgment clearly

United States v. Scs Business & Technical Institute, Inc.

173 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 2, 1999

Dean, 729 F.2d 1100 (7th Cir.1984), even though the term person under § 3730(b)(1) is no more clearly defined than it is under § 3729(a). … In cases involving congressional abrogation of a state's Eleventh Amendment immunity, the applicability of the clear statement rule is well-established and the uncertainties in defining the scope of the Will and Gregory versions

Bernice P. Goodrich v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Afl-Cio

815 F.2d 1519 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 3, 1987

The requirement that factual findings be upheld unless clearly erroneous, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), constrains our review of the evidence. … are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal

Federal Trade Commission v. Manager, Retail Credit Company, Miami Branch Office

515 F.2d 988 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 28, 1975

Clearly agencies in need of greater detail must pursue it according to the strictures of section 604, absent some other statutory basis for access to consumer reports. … As noted, each of these provisions is reinforced by the civil pen-1 alties established in sections 616 and 617. 20 .

First Student, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

935 F.3d 604 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 3, 2019

The Board also found that First Student had not “‘clearly announc[ed] its intent to establish a new set of conditions’ prior to or simultaneously with its March 2 expression of intent to retain the unit employees.” Id. … Op. 3, is clearly in error.