Case law

Koller v. Richardson-Merrell Inc.

737 F.2d 1038 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 15, 1984

DR 7-102(B)(1) provides that "[a] lawyer who receives information clearly establishing that ... … McClellan, 697 F.2d 309, 315-16 (D.C.Cir.1982) (order denying government officials absolute or qualified immunity); Story v.

Thomas S. Culver v. Secretary of the Air Force

559 F.2d 622 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 10, 1977

He does not contend that AFR 35-15 is unconstitutional because it facially reaches others’ clearly protected activity; 4 indeed, in light of the restriction on standing announced in Parker v. … A long line of Supreme Court cases dealing with subversive speech has established this principle. Beginning with Schenck v.

Eagle Broadcasting Group, Ltd. v. Federal Communications Commission

563 F.3d 543 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 28, 2009

Pointing to § 301 of the Act, the Commission noted that the Act clearly prohibits any person from transmitting broadcast signals except with a license granted by the Commission. … The Commission then concluded that, in any event, Eagle had failed to qualify under the statute for license reinstatement.

Alcee L. Hastings, Honorable U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida v. Judicial Conference of the U.S.

829 F.2d 91 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 15, 1987

And “[a] plaintiff who engages in some conduct that is clearly proscribed cannot complain of the vagueness of the law as applied to the conduct of others.” 66 E. … It is worth pointing out that federal judges, the individuals to whom the Act is directed, are unusually well qualified to interpret statutes in light of their legislative history. 60 . S.Rep.

Nat'l Fair Hous. Alliance v. Carson

330 F. Supp. 3d 14 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 17, 2018

The plaintiffs' asserted injury must be clearly identified and then assessed under the D.C. … For example, state housing finance agencies must still use Qualified Allocation Plans ("QAPs") to "establish the criteria by which applicants will be awarded low-income housing tax credits." AFFH Rule, 80 Fed.

United States v. Microsoft Corporation. United States of America v. Microsoft Corporation

56 F.3d 1448 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 17, 1995

Normally, of course, an order permitting or denying amici participation could not qualify under the doctrine. … Anonymity may well confer a kind of immunity which permits a plaintiff to hurl rhetorical weapons that could cause a unique kind of harm not faced in ordinary litigation. Cf. McIntyre v.

Walko Corporation v. Burger Chef Systems, Inc., an Indiana Corporation

554 F.2d 1165 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 2, 1977

Where local law qualifies or abridges it, the federal court must follow suit. … Logically, those choices should be made within parameters established by those charged with formulating other state rules imposing limitations on inauguration of litigation.

National Wildlife Federation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the City of Fort Smith, Arkansas, Intervenor

912 F.2d 1471 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 31, 1990

Kleppe thus clearly establishes that an EIS need not delve into the possible effects of a hypothetical project, but need only focus on the impact of the particular proposal at issue and other pending or recently approved … Insofar as the various agencies’ recommendations involved Phase II, then, they do not qualify as recommendations for conditions or mitigation under section 10(j).

Said v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.

317 F. Supp. 3d 304 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 10, 2018

"To qualify as direct evidence, a statement or remark must ' itself show[ ] ... bias in the employment decision.' " Conn v. Am. … [or] pregnancy, miscarriage, or the birth of a child" (emphasis added) ), which do not necessarily qualify as a "disability" within the meaning of the DCHRA, see D.C.

Franklin, Robert v. DC

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 29, 1998

In both of those cases, appellants filed curt, one paragraph motions, which clearly failed to comply with Rule 7(b)(1). … Would prison officials have to pass over more qualified physicians in the interest of hiring those who spoke several languages? Would bilingual medical staff have to be main- tained around the clock?

Joseph Alan Lykins v. United States Department of Justice and Attorney General of the United States

725 F.2d 1455 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 27, 1984

particular parts of the report to particular FOIA exemptions, nor does it reveal any significant information about the length of the report or the circumstances surrounding its production. 9 Therefore, the public affidavit is clearly … Even in circumstances in which the use of an in camera affidavit has been fully justified, the District Court still would retain the obligation to see to it that materials withheld under FOIA exemptions genuinely qualify

Gatore v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec.

327 F. Supp. 3d 76 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 24, 2018

This evidence clearly supports the existence of a policy or practice of the defendant to never provide any part of an assessment to FOIA requesters. … Opp'n at 13-16 (arguing that the individual plaintiffs *103 have failed to establish numerosity).

Wendy Wagner v. Federal Election Commission

793 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 7, 2015

If contracting were truly immune from political interference, for example, Rep. … Nor is there anything novel or implausible about the idea that contractors may be coerced to make contributions to play in that game, or that more qualified contractors may decline to play at all if the game is rigged.

Orellana v. NBSB Inc.

332 F. Supp. 3d 252 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 18, 2018

An employee may have more than one employer for purposes of FLSA and DCMWA liability, and a corporate officer may qualify as an employer along with the corporation if the officer has operational control of the corporation's … Facts ¶ 2, and in many cases contains facts that are clearly disputed, see, e.g. , Pls.' Facts ¶ 3 n.1. However, given "the clear preference of the Federal Rules to resolve disputes on their merits," Cohen v.

Milan Jankovic v. International Crisis Group

822 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 10, 2016

Cir. 1996)), and “[f]ew public figures have been able clearly and convincingly to prove that the scurrilous things said about them were published by someone with ‘serious doubts as to the truth of his publication.’” Id. … But the court also recognized that “the reporter’s privilege is a qualified one,” because a plaintiff may be able to compel a reporter to divulge his sources if the plaintiff “exhausts all reasonable alternative means of

United States v. Robert L. Pinkney

551 F.2d 1241 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 10, 1976

instruction overstates the degree of uncertainty required for reasonable doubt. 10 And by comparing the level of doubt required in a criminal prosecution to the doubt generated by consideration of the wisdom of buying this clearly … In so doing, it is not our intention to indicate necessarily that the defendant’s representation was unconstitutionally inadequate under established minimum standards.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Benjamin G. Sprecher

81 F.3d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 17, 1996

Roth clearly met the first criterion--he had held the shares more than three years. … The rationale of the rule is to allow quick resolution of SEC actions, and even if based on the same facts--which the statute expressly says is not controlling--counterclaims might raise additional issues, such as immunity

United States v. Howard T. Poole

495 F.2d 115 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 17, 1974

But youth alone does not immunize the young from an appraisal of the extent of current criminality. … The fact that he is near withdrawal, however, does not undercut an effective waiver, after warnings of his rights, or established that he is immune from questioning 1 Davis v.

Kindleberger v. Lincoln Nat. Bank of Washington

155 F.2d 281 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 29, 1946

Buckley died in 1935 and the appellant qualified as administrator of her estate. Michael E. Buckley died in 1943 without having changed the beneficiary designated in the policies. … The presence of the quoted provision in the statute here under consideration clearly overrules stipulations to the contrary which may be contained in policies.

United States v. Jerome T. Bland

472 F.2d 1329 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 19, 1973

In 1966 the Supreme Court spoke clearly and specifically about this area. *1339 See Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 , 86 S.Ct. 1045 , 16 L.Ed.2d 84 (1966). … “Any other offense” would clearly include the violation of a federal statute.