Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
8,912 results
0.99s
605 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 19, 2009
immunity. … of a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established — in either order).
Cited 26 timesPublishedDistrict Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 2018
Courts approach qualified immunity claims through a two-step analysis: (1) whether the alleged facts show that the individual's conduct violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly … Additionally, there can be no question that freedom from racial discrimination is “clearly established” under the Constitution. See Caldwell v. Caesar, 150 F.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, District of Columbia · Apr 5, 2023
After that, “the burden of persuasion rests with the foreign sovereign claiming immunity, which must establish the absence of the factual basis by a preponderance of the evidence.” Agudas Chasidei Chabad of U.S. v. … The ICBC is not immune from suit under the FSIA. As an initial matter, the Court concludes that the ICBC does not qualify for presumptive immunity under the FSIA.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States v. BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg), S.A.
3 F. Supp. 2d 31 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 16, 1998
A petitioner must first establish standing. … pursuant to use immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 .
Cited 3 timesPublishedValore v. Islamic Republic of Iran
478 F. Supp. 2d 101 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2007
establishes his claim or right to relief by evi *106 dence satisfactory to the court.” 28 U.S.C. § 1608 (e); Roeder v. … Finally, the deceased servicemen and their survivors clearly suffered both physical and mental pain and anguish as a direct result of the attack on the barracks.
Cited 21 timesPublished471 F. Supp. 2d 129 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 24, 2007
Bush, 448 F.Supp.2d 198, 200 (D.D.C.2006) (“a plaintiff must *135 overcome the defense of sovereign immunity in order to establish the jurisdiction necessary to survive a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss.”)- Waivers of sovereign … The Court clearly lacks jurisdiction over these claims. Finally, the Court must dismiss Counts 12, 13, 20, and 22 through 26. Those are Mr.
Cited 40 timesPublished458 F. Supp. 945 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 6, 1978
Defendants’ principal line of attack is the exclusivity rule established in Brown v. General Services Administration, 425 U.S. 820 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976). … Sovereign immunity and the various officer immunities offer separate protections that protect separate interests.
Cited 26 timesPublishedLewis v. Government of the District of Columbia
195 F. Supp. 3d 53 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 2016
Judicial immunity bars claims against individual judges in their personal capacities. Smith v. Scalia, 44 F. … Riverside, 500 U.S. at 57 (“intervening weekends” do “not qualify as an extraordinary circumstance”). Second, the District claims that Lewis’s detention was lawful pursuant to D.C. Code § 23-1322(a)(1)(A).
Cited 4 timesPublished224 F. Supp. 3d 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 2016
To the contrary, it is well established that actions taken by judicial officers in their official capacity qualify for absolute immunity from suit. See, e.g., Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 10 (1991); Sindram v. … Although a judge is not immune from criminal prosecution, judicial immunity from civil liability extends even to actions that are allegedly malicious or corrupt.
Cited 10 timesPublishedLoumiet v. United States of America
65 F. Supp. 3d 19 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 21, 2014
Plaintiff clearly could have made this argument at the time the parties briefed Defendants’ motions to dismiss. … . § 2680(h) (the FTCA’s waiver of immunity shall not apply to “any claim arising out of . . . libel [or] slander”).
Cited 30 timesPublished277 F. Supp. 3d 42 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2017
under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1605–07. … Id. at 33 (noting that Hungary’s interests in this case are “clearly paramount”).
Cited 7 timesPublished93 F.R.D. 11 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 10, 1981
At the same time, it is well established that the privilege is not absolute but qualified and may yield in appropriate circumstances. … In Gravel, supra, the Court held that: Rodberg’s immunity, testimonial or otherwise, extends only to legislative acts as to which the Senator himself would be immune.
Cited 20 timesPublished73 F. Supp. 3d 33 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 12, 2014
“[A] plaintiff must overcome the defense of sovereign immunity in order to establish the jurisdiction necessary to survive a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss.” Jackson v. … The record does not establish that requiring exhaustion would be futile: There is no “certainty of an adverse decision or indications that pursuit of administrative remedies would be clearly useless.” Cost v. Soc. Sec.
Cited 7 timesPublished133 F. Supp. 2d 54 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 24, 2001
In this case, the plaintiff established pri-ma-facie cases of sex and age discrimination: 1) he applied for a position, 2) he was qualified, 3) he was in the protected classes (male, 53 years of age), 4) he was not selected … Circuit recognized the well-established rule that sovereign immunity bars suits for money damages against officials in their official capacity, absent a specific waiver by the government. See id. at 103 ; Mot for Summ.
Cited 9 timesPublishedCommon Cause v. Federal Election Commission
676 F. Supp. 286 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 26, 1986
Discussion It is appropriate at the outset to establish the framework for our consideration of the issues presented. First, plaintiff’s petition allows only limited review by this court. … If the Commission indeed relied only on this two-prong test in considering plaintiff’s complaint, it must clearly indicate this fact.
Cited 1 timesPublished607 F. Supp. 1271 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 1985
Rogers claims that he is protected from individual liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … United States International Development-Cooperation Agency, 557 F.Supp. 484 (D.D.C.1983) (qualified immunity discussed in section 1981 action).
Vacated on other grounds by Dougherty v. Barry, 869 F.2d 605 (1989)Cited 11 timesPublishedAmador County, California v. Kempthorne
170 F. Supp. 3d 135 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 16, 2016
The tribes sought equitable relief requiring the Secretary to: (1) “unterminate” each of the seventeen rancherias and (2) restore plaintiffs’ “rights, privileges and immunities” as Native Americans under the United States … These provisions, the Secretary argues, preclusively establish that the Rancheria qualifies as “Indian land.”
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 2025
The Court Declines To Address Defendants’ Qualified Immunity Arguments Defendants alternatively seek summary judgment on a qualified-immunity theory, should the Court “decides to extend Bivens to this case.” … Simply put, the Court is not positioned to resolve Defendants’ qualified immunity arguments on the summary-judgment record the parties presented, at least not without sifting through the entirety of the record itself.
Cited 0 timesPublished580 F. Supp. 2d 93 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2008
“On a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the court has subject-matter jurisdiction.” Larsen v. U.S. … Butz, 510 F.2d 743, 753 (D.C.Cir.1975), and courts should not “ascribe to Congress errors that it clearly did not intend.” Crooker v.
Cited 6 timesPublishedFlythe v. District of Columbia
19 F. Supp. 3d 311 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 25, 2014
Flythe had not been seized by Officer Vazquez for purposes of his excessive force claim against him, and that he had been seized by Officer Eagan, but that Officer Eagan was entitled to qualified immunity because he was … At the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff argued zealously that Officer Eagan’s drug use did not entitle him to qualified immunity. See Pl.’s Opp’n Mot. Summ. J. 18–19, ECF No. 67.
Cited 4 timesPublished
Ask Donna