Case law

Williams Natural Gas Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Texas Gas Transmission Corporation, Amoco Production Company, Southern California Gas Company, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company and Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation, Independent Oil and Gas Association of Pennsylvania, Union Pacific Resources Company, Arco Oil and Gas Company, Division of Atlantic Richfield Company, Texaco, Inc., Pennzoil Exploration and Production Company and Pennzoil Gas Marketing Company, Enserch Exploration, Inc., National Association of Gas Consumers, Intervenors. Arco Oil and Gas Company, Division of Atlantic Richfield Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Williams Natural Gas Company, Independent Oil and Gas Association of West Virginia and Pennsylvania Natural Gas Association, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company and Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation, Intervenors

943 F.2d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 6, 1991

Hence, our decision in Williams I established only--and could establish only--that the orders under review were not self-evidently justified. … Sparse guidelines incorporated in the statutory mandate established only the broad parameters of regulation.

Synovus Financial Corporation v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Southtrust Corporation, Intervenor

952 F.2d 426 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 27, 1992

According to the Board: 11 [STNB] does not currently qualify as "a Georgia bank" under Georgia law because [STNB] operates in Alabama. … I think the answer, for a number of reasons, is clearly no: we should not decide this issue on this record at this time. I would remand the case to the Board without opinion.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency

672 F.2d 42 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 5, 1982

This clearly distinguishes this case from the situation posed in Copeland. See 641 F.2d at 892-93 . … Lennett, and because the amount is clearly reasonable on the facts of this case, we approve the full amount requested for him. .

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

939 F.2d 975 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 19, 1991

Employers qualifying for this exemption are still required, however, to use engineering and work practice controls to reduce exposures below 200 ug/m 3 . … Given the rather modest impact these closings would have on the industry as a whole, these conclusions seem clearly correct.

International Union of the United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry, Local Unions Nos. 141, 229, 681, & 706 v. National Labor Relations Board

675 F.2d 1257 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 16, 1982

Schermerhorn , however, clearly left open the status of the kind of representation fee at issue in this case. … By no account should my views be understood as urging an end run around the position that Congress has clearly taken.

People Against Nuclear Energy v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

678 F.2d 222 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 14, 1982

these hazards is "clearly a governmental function." … If the Commission is not currently equipped to assess psychological health effects, it must add qualified experts to its staff to fulfill its statutory duties.

Baker & Hostetler LLP v. United States Department of Commerce

471 F.3d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 22, 2006

And it is not at all clear whether any portion of meeting notes would qualify as a “summary of the matters discussed” as contemplated by the Tariff Act. … In § 455(b)(3), however, Congress clearly and specifically addressed the effect of prior government service on a judge’s recusal obligations.

Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Company v. Secretary of the Interior

830 F.2d 1168 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 9, 1987

The rationale for such a rule was clearly explained in St. Paul & Pac. R.R. v. Northern Pac. … Santa Fe was under a legal obligation to Aztec to select the lands involved for Aztec, and the latter qualified as an "innocent purchaser for value” under the Transportation Act. Id. at 38, 198 F.2d at 502 . 50 .

Liuksila v. Turner

351 F. Supp. 3d 166 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 26, 2018

Petitioner has failed to establish that the conduct at issue in Finland would not be unlawful if comparable conduct occurred in the United States. … Such conduct, were it to occur in the United States, is clearly proscribed by 18 U.S.C. § 1001 .

Open America v. The Watergate Special Prosecution Force

547 F.2d 605 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 7, 1976

In general, the courts are established to declare rights, and they should not take into account the resources of the defendant as a reason for not declaring a right. … This final court-supervised extension of time is to be allowed where the agency is clearly making a diligent, good-faith effort to complete its review of requested records but could not practically meet the time deadlines

United States v. Oscar Anderson, Jr.

82 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1996

In any event, the point is clearly not critical here, as the Dissent, asserting a greater level of deference than we do, finds the Commission's view not worthy of deference as applied to this set of facts 3 Section 3553(b … Clark, 8 F.3d 839, 842 (D.C.Cir.1993) ("To qualify as 'mitigating' a circumstance must be linked to one of the stated purposes of sentencing, i.e., just punishment, adequate deterrence, public protection, or rehabilitation

Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder

679 F.3d 848 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 18, 2012

According to the County, the preclearance remedy may qualify as congruent and proportional only “when it addresses a coordinated campaign of discrimination intended to circumvent the remedial effects of direct enforcement … “It cannot be constitutional,” Shelby County insists, “to rely on decades-old voting data to establish current voting discrimination.” Id.

Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energenics Systems, Inc., Intervenor

730 F.2d 1509 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 27, 1984

In our view this is clearly wrong. FERC ignored the statute. … That is clearly not the case. But this case involves a number of special circumstances.

Ameren Services Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

880 F.3d 571 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 26, 2018

In this case, we encounter MISO, which qualifies as both an RTO and an ISO. Originally, MISO had allocated the costs equally between the incoming generator and the transmission owner. … FERC cannot sufficiently respond to the transmission owners’ clearly stated concerns about the latter question by merely pointing to the outcome of the former.

National Lime Association v. Environmental Protection Agency and Douglas M. Costle, Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency

627 F.2d 416 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 19, 1980

NOx emission reductions achievable through combustion modification or other control techniques have not been clearly identified for lime kilns. … EPA’s “Method 5” was established as a reference method in 1971. 36 Fed.Reg. 24876, 24888 (1971). 143 . Cf. Ethyl Corp. v.

Charles R. Warren v. United States Parole Commission

659 F.2d 183 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 1, 1981

Like an alien seeking entry into the United States (as distinguished from a lawful resident alien) he does not qualify for procedural due process in seeking parole. 33 32 The system thus had little if anything in the way … For such a statute clearly does violate the ex post facto clause because it disadvantages a prisoner in a way he cannot control.

Carr v. Corning, Superintendent of Public Schools Browne Junior High School Parent-Teacher Ass'n v. Magdeburger

182 F.2d 14 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 14, 1950

The second proposition supports appellants’ case, not appellees’, for the more clearly segregation precludes equality the more clearly it must go. … In other words objective equality, which is clearly required, cannot here be attained without abolishing segregation.

Assn Amer RR v. STB

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

The issue of just who qualified as an "employee affected" so as to merit "severance pay" was never directly confronted. … Just as Congress clearly capped the required payments under s 10902(d) at "one year of severance pay," Congress also clearly defined the method of computation of that benefit.

Weisberg v. U.S. Department of Justice

705 F.2d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 5, 1983

Weisberg insisted that the FBI was still withholding relevant documents, a fact he attempted to establish through interrogatories. … Shea clearly did not share the FBI’s interpretation of the scope of plaintiff’s numerous administrative requests. But his comments do not indicate disagreement with the scope of this action.

United States v. Amrhu A. Dyce

91 F.3d 1462 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 30, 1996

Dyce "has shown nothing more than that which innumerable defendants could no doubt establish: namely, that the imposition of prison sentences normally disrupts ... parental relationships...." United States v. … Even the constraining effect of the Guidelines does not prohibit consideration of these factors--all of which are central, I think, to a nuanced determination of whether family circumstances qualify as "extraordinary" or