Case law

APA Assessment Fee Litigation v. American Psychological Assoc.

766 F.3d 39 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 5, 2014

The landlord cannot immunize himself from an unjust enrichment claim by performing services that the tenant never desired in the first place. … To “justify rescission of a contract based on a misrepresentation,” D.C. law requires a plaintiff to “establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, (i) a misrepresentation, (ii) made in reference to a material fact, that

United States v. Thomas W. Robinson

439 F.2d 553 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 1, 1971

Elizabeths certified to the District Court on August 8, 1968, that appellant was not only competent to stand trial but also qualified for unconditional release; in addition, three hospital doctors and one independent doctor … The Court established no rule governing cases arising in different circumstances.

Sterling H. Nickens v. United States

323 F.2d 808 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 19, 1963

99 U.S.App.D.C. 183 , 238 F.2d 259 (1956). 1 That the delay in doing justice in this case occurred between offense and formal complaint, rather than between complaint, and indictment 2 or indictment and trial, 3 does not immunize … The due process standard as applied in these cases was stated by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the Fay case: 'To establish a violation of the due process clause (of the Fourteenth Amendment) appellant must

Postow v. Oba Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n

627 F.2d 1370 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 18, 1980

(the award “presupposed that the war bonus would continue for the whole period of the libellant’s future working life — clearly an unwarranted assumption”). . … Oriental also argues that because Count I was the major focus of concern throughout most of the litigation, this case does not qualify as a “successful action to enforce” the Truth-in-Lending Act, a predicate to recovery

United States v. Wilson, Ralph T.

160 F.3d 732 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 20, 1998

After Lee, the question remains whether statements against penal interest can qualify as a firmly rooted hearsay exception as a class or whether each state- ment must qualify through its particularized guaranties of trustworthiness … The Lorton tape, see infra Part V, established their motive to kill and to retaliate; James's attorney testified that Ralph had heard portions of the tape; Thomas testified that on that same night Ralph enlisted his

In Re Parkwood, Inc. American Security and Trust Co., Trustee in Reorganization of Parkwood, Inc. v. Equitable Life Insurance Co. In Re Parkwood, Inc. American Security and Trust Co., Trustee in Reorganization of Parkwood, Inc. v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Co. In Re Adams Properties, Inc. American Security and Trust Co., Trustee in Reorganization of Adams Properties, Inc. v. Hartford Life Insurance Co

461 F.2d 158 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 3, 1972

In any event this is the normal effect of a qualifying phrase which the court's opinion recognizes when it states that the words "as agent for others" is dreadfully misplaced. … The general rule is that relative and qualifying words, phrases and clauses are to be applied to the words or phrase immediately preceding and not to others more remote. United States ex rel. Santarelli v.

Secretary of the Army v. Federal Power Commission

425 F.2d 496 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 20, 1970

It wants to establish one. 9 The Commission says that it can exercise authority under § 7(a) to require Seaboard to deliver gas that the Army wants for resale, whether Seaboard wants to or not. … The context was in the course of establishing that the Army qualified under § 7(a) as a gas distribution company to the extent that it obtained gas for resale In any event, the pleadings, evidence, and Commission predicate

National Ass'n of Broadcasters v. Librarian of Congress

146 F.3d 907 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1998

Clearly, the most important element of the decision was the “judgment” of the Panel. The Panel assimilated this information and feels comfortable that it understood the evidence and arguments as presented. … 802 (g), whereas formerly we asked whether the Tribunal’s decision was (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

United States Telecom Ass'n v. Federal Communications Commission

290 F.3d 415 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 24, 2002

The Commission argues that § 251(d)(2), directing it to consider necessity and impairment “at a minimum,” clearly allows it to consider other elements. We assume in favor of the Commission that is so. … Finally, petitioners attack the Commission’s pricing rule, which limited an ILEC’s charges for access to the high frequency portion of the loop to the value the ILEC “allocated to [asymmetric] DSL services when it established

American Lung Association v. EPA

985 F.3d 914 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 19, 2021

sources established pursuant to Section 7411(b). … Clearly yes. Does it require at least some carbon reduction? According to Massachusetts v. EPA, again yes.”).

Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. Federal Power Commission, General Motors Corporation, Intervenors. Mississippi Power and Light Company v. Federal Power Commission, General Motors Corporation, Intervenors

506 F.2d 33 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1974

Order No. 467 does not establish a substantive rule. … Since the issue is not before us, we express no opinion on the question of immunity from civil liability. See generally American Smelting & Refining Co. v.

Transportation Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission

589 F.2d 565 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 21, 1979

In this regard, shippers supporting an application for motor carrier authority must " 'identify clearly the commodities they ship or receive, the points to or from which their traffic moves, the volume of freight they would … I at 56 8 49 U.S.C. § 307 (a) (1970) states that "a certificate shall be issued to any qualified applicant therefor . . . if it is found that . . . the proposed service, to the extent to be authorized by the certificate,

United States v. Western Electric Co.

846 F.2d 1422 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 10, 1988

Indeed, the natural inference from the use of the broader term “other persons” is that the parties to the MFJ meant it to bear wider signification; else they would simply have repeated section II(A)’s more qualified reference … To the extent that the District Court’s holding rests on section 11(B)(3), it is immune from attack on this score. Even if one focuses exclusively on section B(l) of Appendix B, however, the same result follows.

Robert G. Baker v. United States

401 F.2d 958 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 9, 1968

In 1935, Congress, apparently prompted by a paucity of qualified jurors caused by the Cratoford decision, enacted 11 D.C. … Code § 1420 (1940) which provided that Government employees, if otherwise qualified, shall be able to serve as jurors.

State of Mississippi v. EPA

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 2013

Reasonable people might disagree with EPA’s interpretations of the scientific evidence, but any such disagreements must come from those who are qualified to evaluate the science, not us. … “[T]here is,” EPA stated, “no bright line clearly directing the choice of level, and the choice of what is appropriate is clearly a public health policy judgment entrusted to the Administrator.” Id. at 16,482–83.

Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Federal Maritime Commission

371 F.2d 747 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 22, 1966

Petitioner, however, is not able to point to any direct testimony establishing that such an agreement was made. 37 In the face of the evidence relied upon by petitioner and the forceful logic of its argument, the Commission … The Commission would presumably agree that the mere existence of the substantial benefits would not immunize an unreasonable classification system or egregious discrimination. 11 ] It does serve, however, to protect a system

George Stewart v. National Shopmen Pension Fund

730 F.2d 1552 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 30, 1984

That the Fentron holding did not cover situations in which only accrued benefits are reduced can be seen clearly from the Ninth Circuit’s subsequent decision in Elser v. I.A.M. … In neither report is this right qualified by reference to any limitations in §§ 203(c)(1)(B) or 204(g).

Hurd v. Hodge

162 F.2d 233 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 26, 1947

. * * * The Fourteenth Amendment and these statutes enacted in furtherance of its purpose operate to qualify and entitle a colored man to acquire property without state legislation discriminating against him solely because … A New Orleans ordinance forbade Negroes to establish residence in a white community and whites to establish residence in a Negro community (as defined), "except on the written consent of a majority of the persons of the opposite

Lopez, C v. FAA

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 14, 2003

Likewise, in Doe the court explained, citing Vitarelli and Service, that when agencies establish ‘‘special’’ ‘‘pre-termination procedures,’’ they are bound to follow them. 753 F.2d at 1098. … It is not the right of every qualified applicant to be granted a DER designation.’’

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

685 F.2d 459 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 27, 1982

In March 1978 President Carter established an Interagency Nuclear Waste Management Task Force to coordinate the activities of the various agencies conducting long-term waste research, with the ultimate goal of establishing … and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions 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