Case law

United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.

642 F.2d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 16, 1980

Finding the present case clearly within the collateral order doctrine as defined by these precedents, we hold the district court’s discovery to be within our jurisdiction to review as a final order. … This is clearly true in antitrust cases, where Congress has established a policy of private enforcement to supplement governmental action against offenders.

Kessler v. Federal Communications Commission

326 F.2d 673 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 20, 1963

And the effort invested in a determination of individual proposals might be rendered futile by a contrary disposition of the rule making proceeding — thus producing even more delay. * * * ” Clearly, if the Commission may … application is to be considered under existing standards, the public interest would demand that mutually exclusive applications timely tendered be also considered in a comparative hearing designed to ascertain the applicant best qualified

Overby v. Gordon

13 App. D.C. 392 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 2, 1898

. *420 resident of said county, intestate, and that said applicant is a citizen of this State, lawfully qualified for said administration, and no objection appearing to the contrary,” it was thereupon ordered, that said Logan … And Lord Wensleydale, while giving his own definition as to what constitutes domicil of a testator, said: “I take it to be a perfectly clearly established proposition at this day, confirmed by the case of Stanley v.

Tele-Media Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission

697 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1983

It has processed and granted translator applications when the applicant has only provided qualified consents from originating stations. 47 Monroe County has provided the Commission with such qualified consents. … The Commission found such qualified consents adequate and granted the construction permit.

United States v. Khan Mohammed

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 21, 2012

Mohammed does not dispute that the evidence was sufficient to prove he engaged in a qualifying drug offense, that he met the statutory definition of a person who engages in terrorism, or that he knew the transaction would … Mohammed maintains that the evidence does not establish that he intended to use the drug proceeds to buy a car to aid in the Jalalabad attack.

Iceland Steamship Co., Ltd.-Eimskip v. United States Department of the Army

201 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 11, 2000

There is “nothing in the Treaty ... clearly prohibiting] a relationship between the two awardees.” Iceland Steamship Co. v. United States Dep’t of the Army, slip op. at 4, No. 98-2631 (D.D.C. … The plain meaning of the words “Icelandic shipping company” does not compel us to find as a matter of law that TLI does or does not qualify for such status.

Willis E. Wilson, Rep., Estate of Tomikia Wilson v. Good Humor Corporation and David A. Williams

757 F.2d 1293 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 26, 1985

Prior to the 1980 season, however, Good Humor substantially altered its business format and purported to establish its vendors as “independent contractors.” … See, e.g., Prosser and Keeton § 409 at 509-10 (collecting cases); Harper, The Basis of the Immunity of an Employer of an Independent Contractor, 10 Ind. L.J. 494 , 498-500 (1935).

In re: FBOP Execution Protocol Cases

955 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 7, 2020

This account runs contrary to established rules of grammar and statutory interpretation. … The district court did not address this qualifying language, and both parties gloss over it.

Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority v. Environmental Protection Agency

358 F.3d 936 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 24, 2004

subsection *942 applies, the court may reverse any such action found to be —• (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … See Appalachian Poiver Co., 135 F.3d at 816 (finding that a rule was a logical outgrowth where commented “clearly understood” that a matter was under consideration, since “the agency received comments on [the matter] from

National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Illinois Commerce Commission, Kansas Corporation Commission, Oklahoma Corporation Commission, State of Rhode Island & Providence Plantations Division of Public Utilities & Carriers, Public Service Commission of South Carolina, Montana Public Service Commission, and Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, American Trucking Association, American Movers Conference, Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference, Alabama Public Service Commission, Oregon Public Utility Commission, Louisiana Public Service Commission, Mississippi Public Service Commission, Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Nebraska Public Service Commission, American Bus Association, Railroad Commission of Texas, Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, American Insurance Association, National Association of Independent Insurers, Colorado Public Utilities Commission, and Tennessee Public Service Commission, Intervenors. American Insurance Association, and National Association of Independent Insurers v. Interstate Commerce Commission, and United States of America, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, American Trucking Association, American Movers Conference, Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference, and Oregon Public Utility Commission, Intervenors

41 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 2, 1994

The statute directs the ICC to "establish a fee system ... that ... … NARUC and the qualified state petitioners complain that this decision unreasonably limits the states to charges that were assessed under circumstances not covered by the statute.

Council of and for the Blind of Delaware County Valley, Inc. v. Donald T. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury

709 F.2d 1521 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 10, 1983

Congress has established two approaches to the problem of discriminatory expenditures of revenue-sharing funds by recipient localities. … I therefore would allow appellants’ injunctive suit against ORS to proceed if it qualifies as a class action.

United States v. Kevin Williams-Davis

90 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 20, 1996

But our cases say clearly that the trial court has broad discretion over the “methodology” of inquiries into third-party contacts with jurors. Williams, 822 *499 F.2d at 1190. … The decision of the trial court not to hold a post-trial hearing on the subject was clearly within that discretion. II.

Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Drone Advisory Comm.

369 F. Supp. 3d 27 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 25, 2019

Sandoval makes clear that absent a clearly evinced intent to create a cause of action, courts "may not create one, no matter how desirable that might be as a policy matter." … Like the task forces in Anti-Hunger , the DACSC was set up specifically to conduct staff work for the DAC, with a clearly established hierarchical structure mandating for all recommendations to be approved by the DAC.

Anr Pipeline Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Michigan Consolidated Gas Company, Intervenor

71 F.3d 897 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 12, 1995

Indeed, where an agency departs from established precedent without a reasoned explanation, its decision will be vacated as arbitrary and capricious. Pontchartrain Broadcasting Co. v. … FERC concluded that “Order No. 636 clearly requires use of the SFV methodology and finds other rate design methods which place fixed costs in the commodity rates to be unjust and unreasonable.” Id. at 62,015-16.

MBIA Insurance v. Federal Deposit Insurance

708 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 8, 2013

Section 1821(d)(20) is therefore best read as requiring formal, written approval by the FDIC to qualify contract damages for priority as “administrative expenses” under § 1821(d)(11)(A). … Here, as in Wells Fargo, interpreting § 1821(d)(20) in light of Congress’s goals in enacting the depositor preference scheme clearly favors the FDIC’s interpretation.

100Reporters LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Justice

316 F. Supp. 3d 124 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 13, 2018

They document "the way [Siemens] implement[ed] [its] compliance programs," which in this Circuit is "sufficiently 'instrumental' to the [company's] operations to qualify as 'commercial.' " Pub. … A record only qualifies for this privilege if it is both "predecisional" and "deliberative." Access Reports v. DOJ , 926 F.2d 1192 , 1194 (D.C. Cir. 1991).

Hilton v. Kinsey Williams v. Kinsey Little Sisters of the Poor v. Kinsey

185 F.2d 885 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 16, 1950

It is long established that all presumptions are in favor of the validity of a will as against the contention that it violates the rule against perpetuities. Shoemaker v. … Subsequent to his death she was clearly entitled to, and actually received for a period of six years until her death, the income from the entire corpus of the estate.

In Re Theodore Olson

818 F.2d 34 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 27, 1987

No area of the nation seemed to be immune. Acting under this public pressure, Attorney General J. … And the Independent Counsel is clearly an “inferior officer” — he is appointed for a single task to serve for a temporary limited period.

Checkosky v. Sec

23 F.3d 452 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 20, 1994

Id. at 84,172-73. 24 Faced with these conflicting precedents, the Commission failed to clearly choose its present position. … If qualified, the report must now use the qualifying language "except for" or "except" or "with the exception of."

Southwire Company v. National Labor Relations Board

820 F.2d 453 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1987

Truth is certainly a virtue, but it would not immunize an employer’s statement that all employees who sign union authorization cards will be fired. See J.P. Stevens, 638 F.2d at 685. II. … But circumstantial evidence alone may establish unlawful motivation in a § 8(a)(3) case. NLRB v. Link-Belt Co., 311 U.S. 584, 602 , 61 S.Ct. 358, 367 , 85 L.Ed. 368 (1941).