Case law

Honorable Ronald v. Dellums (Frederic J. Dieterle, Michael E. Roche, Bruce Aldrich, Appellees) v. James M. Powell, Chief, United States Capitol Police, Jerry v. Wilson, Chief, Metropolitan Police Department Honorable Ronald v. Dellums v. James M. Powell, Chief, United States Capitol Police Appeal of Jerry v. Wilson, Chief, Metropolitan Police Department, and District of Columbia

566 F.2d 231 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 4, 1977

Their testimony would at best have been cumulative of that of other witnesses on the only issue raised by Chief Powell which actually went to trial: his qualified immunity. … While their testimony might have been relevant in establishing damages to which they were entitled under the Eighth Amendment, we have vacated Eighth Amendment damages in the companion case. See Dellums v.

Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

823 F.3d 641 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 26, 2016

The Commission has established a different mechanism for challenging generic Category 1 findings during individual license renewal proceedings. … But the Court upheld NRC’s determination: “The generic method chosen by the agency is clearly an appropriate method of conducting the hard look required by NEPA.” 462 U.S. at 101.

John Doe v. District of Columbia

697 F.2d 1115 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 7, 1983

It is, of course, well established that due process requires “at a minimum ... that deprivation of life, liberty or property by adjudication be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the … Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 498-504 , 98 S.Ct. 2894, 2906-2909 , 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978) (same “qualified immunity” rules); Tarpley v.

Savas Suzal v. Director, United States Information Agency

32 F.3d 574 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 12, 1994

The contract that the union reached with USIA in its capacity as the representative of this unit plainly qualifies as a “collective bargaining agreement” within the meaning of the CSRA’s chapter on labor-management relations … And the CSRA provides that the grievance procedures established in “any collective bargaining agreement” are “the exclusive procedures for resolving grievances which fall within [the agreement’s] coverage”, except to the

Atlantic Refining Co. v. Standard Oil Co.

304 F.2d 387 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 1962

Under that program, import quotas were established by the United States for qualified importers, who were to adhere voluntarily to such quotas. … We conclude that it is sufficient for the applicant to intervene to show, as the rule clearly provides, that such representation will, or may be inadequate.

National Wildlife Federation v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., National Coal Association and American Mining Congress, (Two Cases)

928 F.2d 453 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 22, 1991

Secretary interpreted the words “in situ” in § 701(28) as modifying “physical processing,” he concluded that physical processing plants that crush, screen, and size coal, i.e., plants that did not separate out impurities, qualified … Our precedent, however, establishes that § 701(28) gives the Secretary the discretion to regulate off-site coal preparation facilities.

Sierra Club v. Environmental Protection Agency

294 F.3d 155 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 2002

An agency may not disregard "the Congression- al intent clearly expressed in the text simply by asserting that its preferred approach would be better policy." Engine Mfrs., 88 F.3d at 1089. … revisions to the SIPs for the Washington Area "contained no measures adopted for the sole purpose of satisfying the RACM requirement," id. at 609/3, so the EPA reviewed on its own initiative all control measures that could qualify

American Maritime Ass'n v. United States

766 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 1985

Instead, the section provides that all ship purchasers who qualify may buy ships which are eligible for CDS payments. … Congress clearly expected MarAd to extend CDS as well as ODS to qualified bulk carriers under the 1970 amendments.

N.Y. Republican State Comm. v. SEC. & Exch. Comm'n

927 F.3d 499 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 18, 2019

As the SEC points out, however, the Supreme Court has instructed that when “statutes are capable of coexistence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed congressional intention to the contrary, to regard … This is not the establishment of a substantial risk.

Carpenter, Joann v. Fed Natl Mtge Assn

174 F.3d 231 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 27, 1999

To do so, he must establish that he was engaged in a protected activity, that his employer took adverse personnel action against him and that the two events were causally connected. See Arthur Young & Co. v. … See Fishbach, 86 F.3d at 1183 (absent pretext, "court must respect the employer's unfettered discre- tion to choose among qualified candidates"). Carpenter alternatively sought remand for discovery under Fed. R.

United States v. Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President

507 F.2d 1194 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 2, 1974

Clearly § 16.4(c) does not say anything about how a cash payment is to be reported. It deals with the promise while it remains a promise only. … They do not assert the topic is immune from statutory coverage.

Matar v. Transp. SEC. Admin.

910 F.3d 538 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 7, 2018

ESTA determines whether a person qualifies to travel to the United States pursuant to the Visa Waiver Program  5 (“VWP”). Id. at 44. … Petitioner Had No “Reasonable Grounds” for Her Untimely Petition for Review The petition for review was clearly untimely under § 46110(a) unless there were “reasonable grounds” justifying Petitioner’s failure to

Schuler v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP

514 F.3d 1365 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 12, 2008

Like his complaint in the district court, see supra at 9-10, Schuler’s February 2005 EEOC charge clearly alleges a pattern and practice of discrimination resulting from PwC’s mandatory retirement and promotion policies. … May 13, 2002) (“[T]he fact that the decision to terminate Plaintiff was made in New York State is not sufficient to establish a violation of the NYSHRL.”); Duffy v.

Xingru Lin v. DC (PUBLIC)

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 13, 2022

For 6 On remand, the district court should first consider whether the officers are entitled to qualified immunity or any other relevant privilege from suit they might assert. … Because qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability,” Mitchell v.

Federal Trade Commission v. Ppg Industries, Inc., Federal Trade Commission v. Ppg Industries, Inc.

798 F.2d 1500 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 22, 1986

That is just what the district court did and we certainly cannot say that its finding was clearly erroneous. … Weyerhaeuser is the law of this circuit and we must follow its rationale and apply the presumptions it establishes.

In Re: Sealed Case

151 F.3d 1059 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 7, 1998

of discovery might cause irreparable harm to one who asserts an immunity from those very burdens. … a prima facie case has been established.

Hall & Assocs. LLC v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency

315 F. Supp. 3d 519 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 22, 2018

Circuit have together established that Exemption 5's protection from disclosure does not apply in certain circumstances. … This language clearly indicated that the EPA was not committing to applying the Eighth Circuit's holding nationwide.

American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Dole

884 F.2d 597 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 29, 1989

At the time, the DOL explained that its objective in establishing this “designed to yield” provision was to ensure piece rates that would permit earnings generally commensurate with the fifty-cent hourly minimum established … Donovan: “This provision clearly aims at preventing growers from raising productivity rates rather than piece rates whenever the [AEWR] increases.” 558 F.Supp. at 222 . *164 We conclude that the agency did not depart from

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers v. EPA

3 F.4th 373 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 2021

This 1-psi waiver allows qualifying fuels to be sold during the summer months at 10.0 psi in attainment areas and 8.8 psi in nonattainment areas. … Sometimes the modifier establishes a minimum allowable amount.

Edward S. Irons v. Sidney A. Diamond, Commissioner of Patents. Edward S. Irons v. Sidney A. Diamond, Commissioner of Patents

670 F.2d 265 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 18, 1981

*270 • 2) If issue 1 is answered in the affirmative, which decisions qualify? … A search fee for such records, as appellant does not contest, is clearly authorized by 5 U.S.C. § 554 (a)(4)(A).