Case law

Public Service Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

857 F.2d 833 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 27, 1988

FERC 29 reaffirmed the mandatory nature of the requirement that issues be presented on rehearing in order to qualify for judicial review. … The Commission’s Opinion No. 164 and related order, insofar as they undertake to establish the effective date of PNM’s rates to Gallup, are set aside.

Boehner, John A. v. McDermott, James A.

484 F.3d 573 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 1, 2007

This established that Representative McDermott, when he accepted the tape, knew the Martins had illegally intercepted the conversation and illegally disclosed it to him. … In Rostenkow-ski, we noted that “the Rulemaking Clause of Article I clearly reserves to each House of the Congress the authority to make its own rules.” Id. at 1306 .

Skelly Oil Company v. Fred J. Russell, Sitting by Designation Pursuant to Title 28, u.s.code, Section 292(c). Skelly Oil Company v. Fred J. Russell Pursuant to F.R.A.P. Rule 43(c)(1) Fred J. Russell, Acting Secretary of the Interior, Has Been Substituted as a Party

436 F.2d 910 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 3, 1970

Skelly argues, however, that since the operations of the two companies were so clearly independent of each other, there is no justification for invoking the control provisions of Section 4(g); that in the administration of … for the allocations under this regulation; '(3) Grant allocations of finished products on the grounds of exceptional hardship to persons who do not qualify for allocations under this regulation; and '(4) Review the revocation

Sierra Club v. Lee M. Thomas, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, American Mining Congress, National Coal Association, Intervenors

828 F.2d 783 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 8, 1987

If that were the only relevant provision, TRAC would clearly apply in this case, but in fact the question of where jurisdiction lies is not so easily resolved. … Our jurisdictional holding in TRAC does not require us to qualify this rule because TRAC, by its own terms, applies only in situations “where a statute commits review of agency action to the Court of Appeals” and thus where

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Herrington

768 F.2d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 16, 1985

In our • view, these questions were clearly material to the rule-making. … The table compares savings from furnace standards to the source consumption of an appliance qualifying for discretionary standards, rather than to the site consumption of an electrical appliance so qualifying.

Weiss v. District Title Ins.

121 F.2d 900 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 19, 1941

Regardless of that, the facts clearly show that plaintiff sustained no legal injury by the payment. The money has been applied in payment of plaintiff’s debt. … In view of the equitable qualify of the action, cf. note 6 supra, the maxim concerning innocent parties, one of whom makes possible the loss, appears not inapplicable here to plaintiff. Cf. McFadden v.

Population Institute v. McPherson

797 F.2d 1062 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 12, 1986

The Administrator asserts that [e]veryone would agree that some kinds of “assistance” constitute “participation,” while others do not; and one may posit a wide spectrum of factual situations, some clearly qualifying as “participation … Because it appears that the district court decision on delegation was correct, appellant has failed to establish a likelihood of success on the first issue.

Kenneth J. Crosthwait v. Federal Communications Commission, F. L. Crowder, Trading as Harriman Broadcasting Company, Intervenor

584 F.2d 550 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 29, 1978

in the organization to be an effective voice in the decisionmaking process.” 17 Through consultation of “the principals and the management of an applicant . with community leaders” it is hoped “that a dialogue [can] be established … [sjince the public interest is best served by having as many qualified applicants as possible competing for each broadcast facility. . . . ” 35 The same justification would seem to apply with equal force to post-decisional

John L. Bailey v. United States

416 F.2d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 7, 1969

If we consider presence, association and flight separately, the Government’s case quite obviously did not qualify for submission to the jury. … Clearly there was no evidence here that could penetrate the first category, nor did the Government rely upon any theory other than aiding and abetting. . Hicks v.

Kleiman & Hochberg, Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture

497 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 14, 2007

The Officer concluded that “[t]he record clearly establishes that John Thomas was [acting] within the scope of his employment” when he bribed Cashin. Id. at 48. … As noted above, however, a 1995 amendment qualified the definition.

Csx Transportation, Inc. v. Surface Transportation Board

75 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 16, 1996

Clearly, the ICC was not required to adopt CSXT's argument that the phrase "in anticipation of" requires an employee to show the railroad's plans. … The provisions shall be at least as beneficial to those interests as the provisions established under sections 11347 and 24706(c) of this title.

Chesapeake Climate Action Network v. EPA

952 F.3d 310 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 13, 2020

WILKINS, Circuit Judge: Congress charged the EPA with establishing emission regulations under the Clean Air Act. … Cir. 1982) (“Because the reasonableness and accuracy of the forecast data is critical to whether a smelter can qualify for an NSO, [petitioners’] objections to that data, if well-founded, would clearly have been ‘of central

Kalaris v. Donovan

697 F.2d 376 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 4, 1983

The protections also help to attract well qualified persons to the federal bench and to promote judicial individualism. … be composed of three members appointed by the Secretary from among individuals who are especially qualified to serve on such Board.

Lutheran Chch MO v. FCC

154 F.3d 487 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 15, 1998

The processing guidelines, for their part, clearly do not require that a station exercise a racial hiring preference, but only set the conditions under which some further inquiry into a station's hiring practices might … As the Supreme Court noted in establishing this frame- work, "[t]he burden of establishing a prima facie case of disparate treatment is not onerous." Burdine, 450 U.S. at 253.

Lorain Journal Co. v. Federal Communications Commission

351 F.2d 824 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 8, 1965

But the foregoing recital clearly shows that in this case the Commission did study and address itself to the salient conclusions and reasoning of the Examiner. … That misrepresentation or concealment of the true conditions as to underlying ownership is adequate ground for denial of renewal of license was established in FCC v.

L.R. Willson and Sons, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor v. L.R. Willson and Sons, Inc., and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

698 F.2d 507 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 18, 1983

The Secretary must provide evidence from persons qualified to express such opinions 18 that, absent the specified protective equipment, the hazard was likely to occur; 19 that use of the specified protective equipment would … ) to require only that employers conform to industry standards: We ... require only those protective measures which the knowledge and experience of the employer's industry, which the employer is presumed to share, would clearly

Mobile Communications Corporation of America v. Federal Communications Commission, Mobile Telecommunications Technologies Corporation, Intervenor. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Cox Enterprises, Inc., Intervenors

77 F.3d 1399 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 8, 1996

The license sought by Mtel clearly fits the first set of cases, where the principles supporting an auction are powerful; indeed, but for the Commission's pioneer's preference policy, that license clearly would have fit Congress's … Thus, the preference award clearly rested, as the Commission said, on Mtel's having developed and applied MCM technology in a simulcast environment.

United States v. Rico Williams

836 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 2, 2016

A rational juror could infer that one of the witnesses would have qualified his testimony had Williams moved out before the jump-in. Cf. United States v. … For example, where the government improperly suggested the defendant must prove his innocence, we have held that the court’s instruction on burden of proof cured the mistake because it clearly informed the jury of the relevant

National Souvenir Center, Inc. v. Historic Figures, Inc.

728 F.2d 503 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 10, 1984

In connection with such advice, [NHM] will make available to FRANCHISEE the services of a qualified individual for two consultation periods, not to exceed one week each in duration at FRANCHISEE’S request during the period … It is precisely this type of antitrust defense that Kosuga clearly held, and Mullins affirmed, to be inappropriate in a simple suit for the purchase price of delivered goods.

Del. Dep't of Natural Res. & Envtl. Control v. Envtl. Prot. Agency

895 F.3d 90 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 10, 2018

In that affirmative context, “any” clearly means “every.” Here, however, we have a conditional context—as EPA may grant an extension upon the application of any state. … While the Act authorizes EPA to establish NAAQS, it delegates to states the responsibility for implementing those standards. Michigan v. EPA, 268 F.3d 1075, 1078 (D.C. Cir. 2001).