Case law

Southern Railway Company v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen

384 F.2d 323 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 21, 1967

They also contend that no promotions from fireman to engineer have been made since 1966 because there were no qualified firemen to fill the positions. … On the other hand, the District Court clearly had jurisdiction to enjoin unilateral attempts by the appellants to modify the existing agreement without following statutory procedures, if the dispute is “major.”

Henry S. Reuss v. John J. Balles

584 F.2d 461 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 27, 1978

They may establish accounts with other Federal Reserve Banks . . . (and) may open accounts and establish agencies in foreign countries for the purpose of purchasing, selling, and collecting bills of exchange. … Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 , 96 S.Ct. 612 , 46 L.Ed.2d 659 (1976), clearly establishes that appellant Reuss has standing as a bondholder to challenge the constitutionality of the composition of the Federal Open Market Committee.

National Labor Relations Board v. CNN America, Inc.

865 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 4, 2017

Whatever weight the Board accorded to CNN’s termination of the Service Agreements, that factor clearly “was not necessary to its decision.” Id. … He concluded that CNN: (1) did not qualify as a joint employer and therefore did not violate the NLRA by terminating the Service Agreements, 361 NLRB No. 47 , at 31-42; (2) did qualify as a successor employer, however, and

Ryan v. Department of Justice

617 F.2d 781 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1980

When interpreted in light of its purpose, however, the language of Exemption 5 clearly embraces this situation. … Answers to questions 3 and 6 will clearly be of this nature. Expressions of personal views or recommendations of a Senator, on the other hand, are clearly exempt from disclosure.

Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Debra Haaland

25 F.4th 12 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 4, 2022

Marie Tribe to establish a “Self-Sufficiency Fund” to hold its share of the judgment. Id. § 108(a)(1). … The Secretary’s decision, however, does not void the Tribe’s purchase of the lands; it simply means 3 Land taken into trust under the Michigan Act might qualify for an exception to IGRA’s prohibition on casinos on lands

Gordon P. Getty v. Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation

805 F.2d 1050 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 21, 1986

Getty also asked us to grant an immediate stay of FSLIC’s orders, and establish a schedule for expedited consideration of the petition for review. … The statutory term “acceptable,” clearly not referring to what is actually accepted, is said to be a term of unbounded plasticity.

United States v. Milford Burkley, (Two Cases)

591 F.2d 903 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 19, 1979

The Government thereupon announced that it would present rebuttal evidence that appellant had distributed heroin on occasions other than those charged in the indictments, but, because of immunity prob *910 lems, the Government … Persuasion, seduction, or cajoling by a private party does not qualify as entrapment even if the defendant was not predisposed to commit the crime prior to such pressure. 16 . In Lopez v.

Vietnam Veterans of America v. Shinseki

599 F.3d 654 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 19, 2010

But the VA had decided he was not entitled to those benefits, so clearly he was seeking to  8 challenge a decision of the Secretary. Id. at 975. … action is essentially no different than an unreasonable delay claim; indeed, if there is any difference at all, it is that an unreasonable delay claim would likely be triggered prior to a delay becoming so prolonged that it qualifies

IGas Holdings, Inc. v. EPA

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 1, 2025

The Framework Rule also established an allocation plan for the 2022–2023 allowances. … The established rules of statutory interpretation “hold[] good for delegations, just as for other statutory provisions.” Id. at 141.

National Ass'n of Broadcasters v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal

675 F.2d 367 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 9, 1982

Section 111(d)(4) requires that the Fund be distributed “among” designated copyright owners, and makes it clear that royalty recipients must qualify under the terms of that section. … The umpire has established precedents on which the players may rely in submitting their claims.

United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc.

289 F. Supp. 3d 145 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 2, 2018

Phoenix is qualified to opine on properties of Zylon fiber, they disagree over whether Dr. … Riley is qualified to opine on whether fiber suppliers should provide a product that meets its purchasing specifications. Dr.

United States v. James Robert Dorsey, United States of America v. Faye Margaret Crawford A/K/A Faye Margaret Powell

591 F.2d 922 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 12, 1979

The trial judge discussed no other means by which the jury could find the “unlawful[ ]” carrying element of section 924(c)(2) established. … (a) What constitutes. — In any mercantile establishment, it is unlawful for any person (1) To remove any goods, wares or merchandise from the immediate place of display or from any other place within the establishment with

Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. United States Department of Justice

846 F.3d 1235 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 31, 2017

According to CREW, this gap between the relief it seeks and the relief available under FOIA means that a claim under FOIA cannot qualify as an “adequate remedy” barring its APA claim. … Considered together, FOIA offers CREW precisely the kind of “special and adequate review procedure[]” that Congress immunized from “duplic[ative]” APA review. Bowen, 487 U.S. at 903.

Bradford National Clearing Corp. v. Securities & Exchange Commission

590 F.2d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 19, 1978

Nonetheless, the three parent organizations have a qualified veto power with respect to all rules of the entity save those imposed by law. . … The Commission clearly acknowledged that, prior to approving an interim (i. e., pre-Phase II) rule change, it must determine that the change does not substantially improve NSCC’s position for the duration of Phase I.

Shands Jacksonville Medical v. Alex Azar, II

959 F.3d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 26, 2020

In a rulemaking on IPPS rates for Fiscal Year 2014, the Secretary adopted the “2-midnight” policy to guide hospitals in determining when to admit Medicare beneficiaries for inpatient care and qualify for reimbursement under … In Tucson Medical Center, 947 F.2d at 979 (citations omitted), the court concluded that “the doctrine of sovereign immunity limits the . . . rights to interest on claims for Medicare reimbursement to that which is expressly

United States v. Donato Battista

876 F.2d 201 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 2, 1989

The facts in this case demonstrate that the officers clearly had such reasonable suspicion to approach Bat-tista. … Battista argues that there is no evidence in the record to show "that this dog had been trained or qualified to detect anything." Br. for Appellant at 12. Compare United States v.

Sierra Club v. Environmental Protection Agency

769 F.2d 796 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 2, 1985

We do not read section 307(f)’s waiver of sovereign immunity so broadly as to allow for fees in connection with the services of outside, nontestifying experts. See Ruckelshaus v. … Similarly, we do not reach the intervenors’ assertions that a petition for certiorari is a purely procedural matter that does not give rise to an action "under” section 307 and thus does not qualify for an award of fees under

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency

512 F.2d 1351 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 1975

Establishment of right to bring suit. … The court put heavy emphasis on “provided for” which it read as qualifying “judicial review.”

Fedex Home Delivery v. National Labor Relations Board

563 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 21, 2009

“[EJvidence of unequal bargaining power” also did not establish “control.” Id. … Because the indicia favoring a finding the contractors are employees are clearly outweighed by evidence of entrepreneurial opportunity, the Board cannot be said to have made a choice between two fairly conflicting views.

Harold Martin v. Department of Justice

488 F.3d 446 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 1, 2007

We therefore agree with the district court that the 1992 Memo qualified for protection in its entirety as attorney work-product because it contains facts “integral to the legal analyses and discussions of investigation Strategy … "Of the records plaintiff sought in the supplemental complaint, the FDIC has established that the 1991 [FDIC] Report of Apparent Crime in which Mr.