Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,967 results
1.87s
655 F.2d 1218 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 4, 1981
section to enforce a trust fund’s compliance with the statutory standards set forth in subsection (c)(5) by eliminating those offensive features in the structure or operation of the trust that would cause it to fail to qualify … The importance of this remedy to employers has been clearly expressed: Unilateral termination by the employer-contributors of allegedly illegal contractual obligations may subject them to an action for breach of the collective
Cited 18 timesPublishedUnited States Telecom Assoc. v. FCC [Order In Slip Opinion Format]
855 F.3d 381 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 1, 2017
So there inevitably will be close cases and debates at the margins about whether a rule qualifies as major. But under any conceivable test for what makes a rule major, the net neutrality rule qualifies as a major rule. … [[Image here]] In the hierarchical court system established by Article III, .a lower court must carefully follow Supreme Court precedent.
Cited 34 timesPublishedFederal Trade Commission v. Texaco, Inc.
555 F.2d 862 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 23, 1977
Taken as a whole, the record in So La II *461 clearly does not support this inference. … The precedents clearly establish this definition of purpose as the starting point for analysis; if the majority chooses to disregard these precedents, the dictates of logic should serve as an adequate substitute.
Cited 45 timesPublishedIsaac Harris v. Medical Transportation Management, Inc.
77 F.4th 746 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 18, 2023
Instead, Rule 23(c)(4) elucidates what district courts can do as part of managing Rule 23-qualifying class actions. … In this case, there are “at least two” questions of law or fact common to the class: “(1) Whether MTM qualifies as a ‘joint employer’ and (2) whether MTM qualifies as a general contractor” under D.C. law.
Cited 12 timesPublished350 F.2d 748 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 23, 1965
The lawsuits sought to establish the invalidity of the decision of the Secretary of the Interior closing the southern half of the Kenai National Moose Range in Alaska for oil and gas leasing, in consequence of which appellants … No. 1549, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. 1 (1960) U.S.Code Congressional and Administrative News, p. 3313 4 The hearing was held pursuant to notice in the Federal Register of October 11, 1957 ( 22 F.R. 8088 ), which clearly stated that
Cited 0 timesPublished872 F.2d 438 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 7, 1989
As the agency's brief to this court states: 23 "New tight formation gas" qualifying under Section 103(b)(2) which was committed or dedicated to interstate commerce on April 20, 1977, and which would not otherwise qualify … FERC's brief to this court states that 40 there should be few cases where gas that is qualified under Section 107(c)(5) has not been qualified for a deregulated status for which it is eligible....
Cited 0 timesPublishedCooper v. National Transportation Safety Board
660 F.3d 476 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 15, 2011
is qualified for, and physically able to perform the duties related to, the position to be authorized by the certificate. Id. § 44703(a). … Moreover, the FAA’s interpretation of its “regulation is to be accorded deference in judicial deliberations,” unless it “is clearly contrary to the plain and sensible meaning of the regulation.”
Cited 10 timesPublishedUnited States v. Gary L. Griffin
707 F.2d 1477 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 13, 1983
Although an agency official wrote in response that some *1480 of the violations Griffin’s attorney had listed would not be valid defenses, he did not assert at that time that the government was immune to any defenses not … If the debtors you represent can prove a defense on the debt, we will pursue the matter with the lender, which has warranted to us that the note qualifies for payment on the federal loan insurance. R.E. 59.
Cited 13 timesPublishedRailway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. National Mediation Board
29 F.3d 655 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 19, 1994
Switchmen’s has not been taken to mean, however, that all Board actions which fall within Section 2, Ninth’s compass are immunized from judicial review. … The cases cited by the Board do not establish a contrary proposition.
Cited 112 timesPublishedRed Sage Ltd. Partnership v. DESPA Deutsche Sparkassen Immobilien-Anlage-Gasellschaft mbH
254 F.3d 1120 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 13, 2001
Thus finding that the parties had not clearly intended to provide for liquidated damages in a case like this, the court construed the rent abatement as a penalty and refused to enforce it. … See In re Swine Flu Immunization Prods. Liab. Litig., 880 F.2d 1439, 1444 (D.C.
Cited 10 timesPublishedCable News Network, Inc. v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation
384 F. Supp. 3d 19 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 2019
The Court's conclusion that the Act is a qualifying statute whose plain language covers the Bureau's redactions thus settles the matter. … The Archey Declaration is clearly a judicial record. In the last go-round, the Government sought leave to file this declaration in camera to bolster is motion for summary judgment. See CNN II , 293 F.
Cited 9 timesPublishedNational Treasury Employees Union v. Horner
854 F.2d 490 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 19, 1988
Testan, 424 U.S. 392 , 96 S.Ct. 948 , 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976), they were “clearly entitled to the declaratory and injunctive relief they seek.” … These factors are clearly insufficient in this case to overcome the presumption in favor of reviewability.
Cited 42 timesPublishedOrange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
905 F.2d 425 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1990
But as neither Tennessee nor Orange and Rockland shouldered the burden of establishing the wisdom or necessity of those principles, we accept the Commission’s adherence to its former view. … But whether because we are inexpert or obtuse, or because the Commission has not expressed itself clearly enough, we are unable to detect reasoned decision-making on this issue.
Cited 2 timesPublished996 F.2d 413 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 1993
Smalls met her burden of establishing that she was no longer capable of performing her past “light work” as a bank teller. … To begin with, it is clearly stated in the Secretary’s regulations that an individual must be able to lift up to Í0 pounds to be qualified for “sedentary work.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567 (a). Both Ms. Smalls and Dr.
Cited 6 timesPublished349 F.2d 210 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 30, 1965
With more funds for more personnel, more undercover agents could be used and *213 qualified persons would be available. … We note only that in Red-field the defendant’s sentence could clearly have been supported by an offense charged to have occurred within three months prior to his arrest.
Questioned by Gordan v. United States, 271 F. Supp. 950 (1967)Cited 225 timesPublishedBetty Martin v. Office of Special Counsel, Merit Systems Protection Board
819 F.2d 1181 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 5, 1987
The words of a statute presumptively establish its meaning, and the intent of Congress behind it. State of Montana v. Clark, 749 F.2d 740, 747 (D.C.Cir.1984). … In that case, the Court explicitly rejected the notion that “purely factual material can never qualify for protection under Exemption 5.” 465 U.S. at 800 n. 17, 104 S.Ct. at 1493 n. 17.
Cited 175 timesPublishedUS Ex Rel. Miller v. BILL HARBERT INTERN. CONST.
608 F.3d 871 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 2010
The court clearly did not abuse that discretion. … This standard is clearly satisfied here.
Cited 2 timesPublished259 F.2d 921 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 23, 1958
As the Supreme Court has pointed out 10 "* * * Congress would not, without clearly expressing such a purpose, deprive the Court of Appeals of its customary power to stay orders under review." 11 Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. … 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?
Cited 231 timesPublishedBruce S. Andes, Louis S. Aronica v. Ford Motor Company
70 F.3d 1332 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 24, 1996
Haus-man, Ford rejected this proposal because the GRP was a “very generous plan” to begin with, a “cutoff’ point had to be established, and allowing a “grow in” in this sale would establish a precedent for future sales of … A finding to the contrary would be clearly erroneous.” Gavalik, 812 F.2d at 864 (citation omitted).
Cited 23 timesPublishedA.I. Trade Finance, Inc. v. Petra International Banking Corporation
62 F.3d 1454 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 22, 1995
sovereign immunity as an aspect of substantive federal law and applying those standards will generally require interpretation of numerous points of federal law.” … appears to be the general rule: a federal court applies state law when it decides an issue not addressed by federal law, regardless of the source from which the cause of action is deemed to have arisen for the purpose of establishing
Cited 133 timesPublished
Ask Donna