Case law

United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission

198 F.2d 958 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 18, 1952

The Commission gives no valid reason why “impracticality” excuses such a departure from the filed tariffs and immunizes it from the prohibition of Section 6(7) of the Interstate Commerce Act. … Clearly, they considered themselves no longer under any obligation to furnish wharfage and handling. 12 Nor did the Government’s action, taken in an emergency to assure a smooth flow of war materiel, increase the cost to

Clay v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.

184 F.2d 995 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 7, 1950

Such a view disregards the obvious fact that public utility status alone does not deprive a company of the power to contract. 5 If followed, it would immunize the Company from liability for any of the incidental obligations … I think, as the trial judge held, that no breach of contract was shown by the plaintiff in this action. 16 In the next place, I think that appellant did not establish a contract.

Jost, Kevin v. STB

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 22, 1999

CKR filed a notice of exemption with the Board, indicating that the line qualified as "out-of-service." … How- ever, the Board's presumption that a trail sponsor is qualified is rebuttable.

National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting and Friends of the Earth v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (Abc), Cbs, Inc., Intervenors. Committee for Open Media v. Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America, Council on Economic Priorities and United Farm Workers of America and Henry Geller, Intervenors. Council on Economic Priorities v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, United Farm Workers of America, Intervenor

567 F.2d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 11, 1977

This was clearly established in Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. … We further note that where there is offered an opportunity to speak on an issue, but no one takes advantage of the opportunity, it is highly doubtful that the issues could qualify as one of importance 74 The opinion in CBS

Flagstaff Medical Center, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

715 F.3d 928 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 26, 2013

Bradel and Schuler established from the outset of the meeting that they wanted to learn about employees’ issues, concerns, and problems. … Schuler clearly testified that his admittedly ambiguous statement did not mean what the Board now asserts but rather meant only that “at the time I was giving the affidavit, in retrospect” he could have guessed Conant supported

Maurice C. Dreicer v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

665 F.2d 1292 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 24, 1981

erroneous. 36 True it is that the court recognized that Dreicer continued to revise old ideas and develop new ones for radio and television programs during the 1960’s and 1970’s. 37 But the record does not establish either … The Tax Court’s findings of fact are binding on federal courts of appeals unless clearly erroneous. I.R.C. § 7482(a); Commissioner v.

Plaquemines Port, Harbor and Terminal District v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, New Orleans Steamship Association, Intervenors. New Orleans Steamship Association v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, Association of Ship Brokers and Agents, Inc., Plaquemines Port, Harbor and Terminal District, Intervenors

838 F.2d 536 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 2, 1988

The 1916 Act, therefore, granted antitrust immunity to shippers' cartels. … The argument is clearly wrong. See, e.g., Reid v. Engen, 765 F.2d 1457, 1461 (9th Cir.1985); Motor & Equip. Mfrs. Ass'n v. EPA, 627 F.2d at 1114-15 .

Cities of Statesville v. Atomic Energy Commission

441 F.2d 962 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 5, 1969

They alleged that the project, in its present form, clearly violated the spirit of the antitrust laws, and requested that Piedmont be given a share of the project so that it could represent the interests of the municipalities … The petitioners, in reading section 105(c) in the light of section 104(b), are attempting to make that language, clearly applicable to section 103 on its face, circuitously applicable to section 104(b) licensing.

Troy Corporation v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and Environmental Protection Agency

120 F.3d 277 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 1, 1997

As we have said, we review scientific judgments of the agency “not as the chemist, biologist, or statistician that we are qualified neither by training nor experience to be, but as a reviewing court exercising our narrowly … In addition, the study did not clearly address pulmonary irritation. The EPA was not required to consider a study that did not clearly address the matter at issue. Portland Cement Ass’n v.

Office Of Communication Of The United Church Of Christ v. Federal Communications Commission

425 F.2d 543 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 5, 1969

As we noted in our dissenting opinion, the court of appeals clearly expressed its expectation that the Commission would resolve the problem by placing upon petitioners [Public Interest Intervenors] "only the burden of going … proceedings on remand had been hopelessly bungled and that the public interest was best served by taking note of the early expiration date * and getting on with a new hearing in which the Commission can decide who is best qualified

National Petrochemical & Refiners Ass'n v. Environmental Protection Agency

643 F.3d 958 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 21, 2010

Likewise they “lacked assurance that RINs they might accumulate prior to the issuance of a final rule would qualify under the RFS2 program.” Id. … effects, EPA has fulfilled its obligation “to consider the relative benefits and burdens,” National Cable, 567 F.3d at 671, in concluding that applying the RFS2 standard to the entire 2010 calendar year was the course “clearly

Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Anne M. Gorsuch, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Exxon Corporation, Texas City Refining, Inc., Environmental Defense Fund, Texaco, Inc., Intervenors. Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Anne M. Gorsuch, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Exxon Corporation, Sun Refining and Marketing Company, Texas City Refining, Inc., Environmental Defense Fund, Texaco, Inc., Intervenors. Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Anne M. Gorsuch, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Defense Fund, United Refining Company, Texaco, Inc., Exxon Corporation, Texas City Refining, Inc., Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenors. Plateau, Inc. v. Anne M. Gorsuch, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Environmental Protection Agency, Simmons Oil Company v. Anne M. Gorsuch, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Environmental Protection Agency

705 F.2d 506 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 1983

qualify as "small." … Congress established a clearly defined record to facilitate judicial review and to enhance agency decisionmaking. See Sierra Club v.

Celia A. Wren v. Merit Systems Protection Board

681 F.2d 867 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 1982

This Office, however, is not authorized to deal with or seek redress for employee complaints or grievances which may be resolved more appropriately under established complaint, grievance, or appeals procedures unless it involves … Indeed, we find nothing in the statute to qualify the OSC’s authority and responsibility to investigate an employee’s allegation of retaliation for whistleblowing at least to the extent of ascertaining if that complaint is

United States Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons Federal Correctional Complex Coleman v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

737 F.3d 779 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 17, 2013

Under this test, the Authority requires the union to establish that the proposal is in fact intended as an arrangement to benefit employees. … In sum, we can find no grounds upon which to overturn the judgment of the *786 Authority with respect to Proposal 1.- The Authority’s decision clearly passes muster under the applicable standard of review. Y.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 68, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

448 F.2d 1127 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 15, 1971

LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge (dissenting) : I had originally thought that this was the case dreamed of by law school professors, a case where I could conscientiously say that although I considered the findings “clearly erroneous … These facts plainly established a basis for the Union to believe that the company was abandoning the practice of separate bargaining on these issues.

Center for Auto Safety & Public Citizen, Inc. v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

452 F.3d 798 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 23, 2006

In sum, the 1998 policy guidelines do not, as appellants claim, establish new rights and obligations for automakers. … But defacto compliance is not enough to establish that the guidelines have had legal consequences.

Nicolas Talbott v. USA

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 9, 2025

Enabling All Qualified Americans to Serve Their Country in Uniform, 86 Fed. Reg. 7,471 (Jan. 28, 2021). … open service by qualified transgender individuals has had a positive effect on military readiness and unit cohesion.

Monsanto Co. v. Kennedy

613 F.2d 947 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 6, 1979

discuss below, there is latitude inherent in the statutory scheme to avoid literal application of the statutory definition of “food additive” in those de minimis situations that, in the informed judgment of the Commissioner, clearly … manufacturing, packing, processing, preparing, treating, packaging, transporting, or holding food; and including any source of radi- ■ ation intended for any such use), if such substance is not generally recognized, among experts qualified

Joseph C. Steffan v. William J. Perry, Secretary of Defense

41 F.3d 677 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 22, 1994

redressable by the court (through reinstatement and a declaratory judgment), thus clearly conferring Article III standing. … Clearly the Navy may not exercise this power over the minds of servicemembers by discharging them on the basis of inquiries about “homosexuality.”

International Harvester Company v. William D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, General Motors Corporation v. William D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Chrysler Corporation, a Delaware Corporation v. William D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Ford Motor Company v. William D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency

478 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 12, 1973

The same NAS Report had stated: 34 38 . . . the status of development and rate of progress made it possible that the larger manufacturers will be able to produce vehicles that will qualify, provided that provisions are made … Requirement of Observed Data From Manufacturers 123 Clearly this requires that the applicants come forward with data which showed that they could not comply with the contemplated standards.