Case law

WOKO, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

153 F.2d 623 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 22, 1946

and accurately reflect the facts. “(2) To determine all the circumstances and conditions under which the stock of WOKO, Inc., has been issued, transferred, or assigned. “(3) To determine whether or not the applicant is qualified … The question posed by this appeal is whether it clearly appears that this finding of the Commission is arbitrary or capricious, for the statute provides (U.S.

Fleisher Development Corporation v. Home Owners Warranty Corporation Fleisher Development Corporation v. Home Owners Warranty Corporation

856 F.2d 1529 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 2, 1988

Against that, HWC had “proffered no evidence that the plaintiff’s [sic] motives are clearly improper.” Id. … The Chancery Court disagreed, holding that the precedents established no such inflexible principle.

United States v. Moore, Ricky

394 F.3d 925 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 11, 2005

A defendant who qualifies for a decrease under § 3E1.1(a) may receive an additional reduction of one level under § 3E1.1(b) if he has assisted authorities in the investigation or prosecution of his own misconduct … Moore would have been clearly eligible for the third-point reduction.” Contrary to Moore’s contention, the record shows it was not Mr.

Thomas Davis v. PBGC

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.

Starpower Communications, LLC v. Federal Communications Commission

334 F.3d 1150 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 18, 2003

The Commis- sion concluded that the 1998 and 1999 Agreements clearly and unambiguously did not require reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound traffic. … In addition, Starpower advances a plausible interpre- tation of the terms ‘‘local traffic’’ and ‘‘terminate,’’ as they appear in the two agreements: Simply put, a call to an ISP ‘‘terminates’’ at the ISP and therefore qualifies

Wisconsin Electric Power Company v. Department of Energy and United States of America, Wisconsin Electric Power Company v. Donald P. Hodel, Secretary, Department of Energy

778 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 6, 1985

The companion fee provision establishing the one-time or subsection (a)(3) fee, 42 U.S.C. … Without this qualifying phrase, the fee would be imposed on electricity from other sources, even that generated by, say, military nuclear facilities or even that generated by non-nuclear facilities.

United States v. Broadie, Morris

452 F.3d 875 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 7, 2006

Although defense counsel did say, “An ASP baton is a dangerous weapon,” he qualified his statement, adding “just as a knife, for instance, is a dangerous weapon.” … And just “as [with] a knife,” the Government must establish probable cause to believe the suspect intended to use the ASP baton to cause great bodily injury.

American Export-Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc. v. Federal Maritime Commission

389 F.2d 962 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 18, 1968

But clearly the Commission’s orders are not contradictory. … Because of the terminal operators’ disclaimer of liability in Truck Tariff No. 6, which immunizes the steamship companies and others operating piers at New York Harbor, the truckers’ only recourse has been to try to collect

Hill, Joyce M. v. Norton, Gale A.

275 F.3d 98 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 28, 2001

The Secretary initially maintained the established definition of migratory birds. See, e.g., 50 C.F.R. s 10.1 (1961). … Hill clearly has the better of this argument, for the statute appears as plain as she suggests.

Business Executives' Move for Vietnam Peace v. Federal Communications Commission

450 F.2d 642 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 3, 1971

If an individual is interviewed for a news program, he may expect his comments to be abbreviated and edited; reporters’ commentary will qualify what he has to say. … Clearly, for example, broadcasters are entitled to place an outside limit on the total amount of editorial advertising they will sell.

Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n v. Federal Power Commission

259 F.2d 921 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 29, 1958

As the Supreme Court has pointed out “* * * Congress would not, without clearly expressing such a purpose, deprive the Court of Appeals of its customary power to stay orders under review.” Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. … Relief saving one claimant from irreparable injury, at the expense of similar harm caused another, might not qualify as the equitable judgment that a stay represents. (4) Where lies the public interest?

National Association of Broadcasters v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal, Major League Baseball, Motion Picture Association of America, Inc., Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Broadcast Music, Inc., Superstation,inc., National Public Radio, Public Broadcasting Service, National Collegiateathleticassociation, Intervenors. National Public Radio v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal, Major League Baseball, Motion Picture Association of America, Inc., Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Broadcast Music, Inc., Nationalassociation of Broadcasters, Superstation, Inc., Public Broadcasting Service,national Collegiateathletic Association, Intervenors. Major League Baseball, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League,and North American Soccer League v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal and the United States of America, Motion Picture Association of America, Inc., Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Broadcast Music, Inc., National Association of Broadcasters,superstation, Inc., National Public Radio, Public Broadcasting Service,national Collegiate Athleticassociation, Intervenors. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal, Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Major League Baseball, Broadcastmusic, Inc., National Association of Broadcasters, Superstation, Inc., Nationalpublic Radio, Public Broadcasting Service, National Collegiate Athleticassociation,intervenors. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal, Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Major League Baseball, Nationalassociation of Broadcasters, Broadcast Music, Inc., Superstation, Inc., National Public Radio, Public Broadcasting Service, National Collegiateathletic Association,intervenors

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.

Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson v. Thomas J. Dodd

410 F.2d 701 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 9, 1969

But in analyzing a claimed breach of privacy, injuries from intrusion and injuries from publication should be kept clearly separate. … There is an anomaly lurking in this situation: the news media regard themselves as quasi-public institutions yet they demand immunity from the restraints which they vigorously demand be placed on government.

Transactive Corporation v. United States of America and Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of Treasury

91 F.3d 232 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 13, 1996

No statutory provision, however, clearly establishes when Treasury may choose to use an IEI to obtain financial services instead of relying on the procurement procedures of the CICA, 41 U.S.C. § 251 et seq., further described … The most critical to this litigation is that a bid process pursuant to CICA may select any qualified vendor, but an IEI may select only a financial institution.

Cactus Canyon Quarries, Inc. v. Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

820 F.3d 12 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

Finally, Cactus Canyon contends that the legislative history of the EAJA clearly demonstrates that a defendant who obtains a voluntary dismissal is entitled to “prevailing party” status. … Straus, we noted that “[r]es judicata effect would certainly qualify as judicial relief where, for  13 example, it protected the prevailing [party] from having to pay damages or alter its conduct

National Association of Regional Medical Programs, Inc. v. Mathews

551 F.2d 340 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 6, 1977

The Public Health Service Act clearly sets forth the purposes for which the appropriated funds are to be used; attorney's fees are not mentioned. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 229 -299j (1970). … ) the named representative must not have antagonistic or conflicting interests with the unnamed members of the class, and 2) the representative must appear able to vigorously prosecute the interests of the class through qualified

Steenholdt v. Federal Aviation Administration

314 F.3d 633 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 10, 2003

The FA Act very clearly commits the renewal/nonrenewal designation to agency discretion. … In addition, the FAA clearly addresses Peti- tioner's arguments in Prather's letter on first-level review.

General Service Employees Union Local No. 73, Affiliated With Service Employees International Union, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

578 F.2d 361 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 4, 1978

attempting to demonstrate that the introductory wording of a section in a statute should be deemed inapplicable to one of its subsections, despite this wording’s conceded applicability to the entire rest of the section clearly … disclaimers of recognitional motives. 57 The Union may well have been acting partly out of concern over what it believed to be the possibility of substandard working conditions at A-l Security, but this is insufficient to immunize

Lorton Blair v. Orville Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture of the United States

370 F.2d 229 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 18, 1966

With irrelevant exceptions no producer located more than 120 miles away may qualify for this nearby differential. … Calling the nearby differential a “location” adjustment does not establish its permissibility. It clearly is not based on the location of delivery to the handler, the terms in which the Act speaks.

National Association of Home Health Agencies v. Richard S. Schweiker

690 F.2d 932 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 14, 1982

Thus, freestanding HHAs had at least a qualified right to choose with whom they dealt. The December 1981 instruction foreclosed that option, eliminating the qualified right. … In full the statute provides: Except as otherwise provided in this sub-chapter and in the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974, the insurance programs established by this subchapter shall be administered by the Secretary.