Case law

Southern California Edison Company v. Federal Power Commission, American Smelting and Refining Co., Arizona Public Service Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Gas Co., Tucson Gas & Electric Co., Nevada Industrial Customers General Motors Corporation, the People of the State of California, Southwest Gas Corporation, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement District, and Johns-Manville Products Corporation, Intervenors. Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles v. Federal Power Commission, American Smelting and Refining Company, Compania Minera De Cananea, S. A. Inspiration Consolidated Copper Company, Kennecott Copper Corp., Arizona Public Service Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company, Tucson Gas & Electric Co., Nevada Industrial Customers, General Motors Corporation, People of the State of California, Southwest Gas Corporation, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, and Johns-Manville Products Corporation, Intervenors

524 F.2d 409 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 4, 1975

situations (including environmental emergencies) during periods of curtailment where supplemental deliveries are required to forestall irreparable injury to life or property." 34 Upon a sufficient allegation, petitioners might qualify … As noted in other curtailment cases, any party who finds itself in a position such as this and can clearly show the Commission that such a situation exists is free to ask for extraordinary relief at any time."

Willie E. Pendergrast v. United States

416 F.2d 776 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 26, 1969

Without benefit of the Simmons-Bailey constitutional interpretations, the District Court’s action on appellant’s request for testimonial immunization was squarely supported by the overwhelming weight of prior federal judicial … Clearly the Government could not properly have used appellant’s testimony affirmatively at the trial. Simmons v. United States, supra note 9, 390 U.S. at 394 , 88 S.Ct. 967 ; Bailey v.

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

656 F.2d 768 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 7, 1981

This is most clearly reflected in the language of section 1311(h)(2). … The statutory deadline is not extended unless an application is granted, a result clearly intended by Congress.

Girardeau A. Spann v. Colonial Village, Inc. Girardeau A. Spann v. Marvin J. Gerstin

899 F.2d 24 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 13, 1990

That decision, we hold, qualifies as “final” for purposes of appellate review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (authorizing review of “final decisions” of district courts). … MWPHA and FHC have not clearly charged how the challenged advertisements "deprive[ ] [their members or constituents] of the benefits of living in a racially integrated community.”

Select Specialty Hospital-Denver, Inc. v. Azar

391 F. Supp. 3d 53 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 22, 2019

This policy change in October 1, 2003 was clearly not understood by CMS's own Intermediary to apply universally to all providers, however, because shortly thereafter, on October 15, 2003, the CMS Intermediary issued a newsletter … HHS's own briefing later indicates means only that providers need not 'fully' participate in Medicaid, because states "are 'required to permit the provider to enroll for the limited purpose of obtaining adjudication of the [Qualified

United States v. Darnell R. Kinnard, United States of America v. Mahlon Payne

465 F.2d 566 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 13, 1972

The prosecutor said the jury was not qualified to make an inference from its own inspection of his arms. … THE PROSECUTOR: This officer has not been qualified to give an opinion. THE COURT: Maybe narcotic addicts are reliable and some are not reliable.

Georgia Hall and Edward Hall v. General Motors Corporation, Buick Division, Larry Buick, Incorporated

647 F.2d 175 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 24, 1980

The trial judge has broad leeway in making this determination; her ruling will not be upset unless it is clearly erroneous. Derr v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 404 F.2d 634, 639 (10th Cir. 1968). … An accident reconstruction expert is apparently one who is qualified to give an opinion as to the cause of an accident without having witnessed the event. Cf. J.A. 682. 29 . J.A. 453-54. 30 .

McLouth Steel Products Corporation v. Lee M. Thomas, Administrator, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

838 F.2d 1317 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 10, 1988

Subtitle C of RCRA requires EPA to promulgate regulations establishing a comprehensive federal management system to protect human health and the environment from hazardous wastes. 42 U.S.C. §§ 6921-34 . … Though such a provision for exceptions obviously qualifies a rule— it’s not “ironclad” — , it does not push it much in the direction of a policy statement.

Taylor, Brent v. Blakey, Marion

490 F.3d 965 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 2007

Unlike the courts just cited, we do not believe that only a legal relationship may qualify as a “close relationship.” … Taylor has raised the same claim as had Herrick, and the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Herrick’s case was clearly a final judgment on the merits.

Entergy Services, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Southern Company Services, Inc., Intervenors

391 F.3d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 11, 2005

If further proof is needed that such contracts do not fall within that exception to the mootness rule, the petition of Nevada Power, which remains an active controversy before us, clearly establishes that an IA need not evade … Given the facts in Pasadena Cogeneration, he clearly endorsed an "At or Beyond" test in 1999.

United States v. Marcos Loinas Anderson, A/K/A Marcos Loynas Anderson, A/K/A T. Torrero, A/K/A Samuel Perez, United States of America v. Maria Berdecia, A/K/A Maria C. Depalacio, A/K/A Consuela, United States of America v. Norberto Garces, A/K/A Victorio Torres, Piro, United States of America v. Gabriel Ruperto Davis-Munoz, A/K/A Gabriel Davis, Gabelin, United States of America v. Alfredo Brathwaite, A/K/A Sealy, Alfredo West, Freddie, United States of America v. Beverly Elaine Nelson, A/K/A Beverly M. Nelson, United States of America v. Robert Luis Castillo, A/K/A Robert Luis Castillo-Garrido, United States of America v. Antonio Scott, A/K/A Tony Anderson, Tony, United States of America v. Leonard Lancelot Shand, A/K/A Steve, United States of America v. Vielka Dudley, A/K/A Vielka Dudley-Maynard, Vielka Davis, Benky, United States of America v. Antonio Scott, A/K/A Tony Anderson, Tony, United States of America v. Michael Jonathan Booze, United States of America v. Thomas Timothy Booze, A/K/A Timmy, United States of America v. Gregory Orlander Booze

39 F.3d 331 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 9, 1995

Specifically, the appellants argue that the trial evidence at most established multiple conspiracies rather than the single conspiracy charged in the indictment. … is not included in establishing the defendant's offense level under this guideline. 72 U.S.S.G.

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations v. NLRB

57 F.4th 1023 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 17, 2023

Co., 22 F.3d at 326), and therefore do not qualify as procedural rules for purposes of the section 553 exemption. … It therefore does not qualify as procedural for purposes of the section 553 exception.

Floretta McKenzie Superintendent, D.C. Public Schools v. Christopher Smith, by His Parents

771 F.2d 1527 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 30, 1985

Thus, the district court’s finding that DCPS “failed to establish that the Coolidge Senior High School Learning Disabilities Center ... … It is developed jointly by a qualified representative of the local educational agency, the child’s teacher, the parents or guardian, and when appropriate, the child. 3 .

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Thomas

805 F.2d 410 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 7, 1986

would forge between the Report’s reference to International Harvester’s dicta about the usefulness of NCPs and the NRDC’s argument that the 1977 amendments literally mandated a leader-based standard is far too tenuous to qualify … Second, as quoted in the text, both the House and the Senate Reports clearly contemplate a gasoline-based revised standard.

John Croley v. Joint Committee on Judicial Administration

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 2018

The Joint Committee recognized at argument that Croley’s complaint “clearly” levies “general policy-like” challenges, independent of challenges to specific D.C. court orders. See Oral Arg. … The Joint Committee maintains that, even were we to reverse the district court’s Rooker-Feldman ruling, we should affirm its dismissal of Croley’s complaint on non-jurisdictional grounds, such as judicial immunity, preclusion

Idaho ex rel. Idaho Public Utilities Commission v. Interstate Commerce Commission

35 F.3d 585 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 4, 1994

Thus, the State can clearly assert the NEPA claim. The harder question is whether the State has *592 prudential standing to assert the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) claim. … These events would seem to qualify as “receipt of’ and “concurrence with” the species list, but 180 days have long since elapsed and no biological assessment has been prepared.

Lannan Found. v. Gingold

300 F. Supp. 3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 25, 2017

The court first noted that neither plaintiff qualified for compensation as a plaintiff in the underlying class action. Id. … As Gingold points out, the Foundation knew how to draft language that would more clearly create legal obligations. It did so elsewhere in the Grant Agreements.

Federal Election Commission v. MacHinists Non-Partisan Political League

655 F.2d 380 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 13, 1981

The court is aware that the complaints and the Oldaker “reason to believe” notice discussed in the text, immediately infra, may qualify for protection from disclosure under 2 U.S.C. § 437g(a)(12), and under the Commission … In our day, the Supreme Court has recognized that “debate on the qualifications of candidates [is] integral to the operation of the system of government established by our Constitution.” Buckley v.

Augustus E. Harvin v. United States

445 F.2d 675 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 7, 1971

For example, a misdemeanant sentenced under the FYCA may be so immune to rehabilitation that no “treatment” short of the traditional prison regimen will be helpful to him; to place such an offender in a more lenient therapeutic … If he is released earlier he will not be ready for the task of establishing himself; if later, he may have become bitter, unsure of himself. * * * Rarely does a day go by in one of our institutions for younger offenders without

Intermountain Insurance Serv. v. Commissioner, IRS

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 18, 2011

We would simply assume Congress intended the text to convey that established pre-reenactment meaning. See Davis v. … Moreover, clearly aware of that debate, Congress added subsection (i) to section 6501(e)(1)(A) to resolve it.