Case law

Jathoul v. Clinton

880 F. Supp. 2d 168 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 2, 2012

Matters of policy toward aliens are “so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” Id. at 1159 (quoting Harisiades v. … Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the consular action falls within this exception, see Dunn & Black, P.S. v.

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians v. United States Department of the Interior

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 4, 2026

As part of NEPA, Congress established the Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”). 42 U.S.C. § 4342. … IRA Privileges and Immunities DOI’s decision also complied with the IRA’s privileges-and-immunities clause.

Oviedo v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 16, 2018

In each instance, Plaintiff wrote, “a younger less qualified non-Hispanic American was hired.” (Id.) … Cir. 1986) (“WMATA’s sovereign immunity exists because the signatories have successfully conferred their respective sovereign immunities upon it.”).

Jefferies v. District of Columbia

916 F. Supp. 2d 42 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2013

Specifically, the PLCAA states, “A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court” and “[a] qualified civil liability action that is pending on October 26, 2005, shall be immediately dismissed … The PLCAA explicitly and clearly prohibits this kind of suit.

Federal Election Commission v. Christian Coalition

179 F.R.D. 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 12, 1998

This is a codification of the qualified immunity for trial preparation materials recognized by the Supreme Court in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 , 67 S.Ct. 385 , 91 L.Ed. 451 (1947). See Fed. … against invading the privacy of an attorney’s course of preparation is so well recognized and so essential to an orderly working of our system of legal procedure that a burden rests on the one who would invade that privacy to establish

Swecker v. Midland Power Cooperative

253 F. Supp. 3d 274 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 17, 2017

. § 824am3(a). ln furtherance of this objective, PURPA directs .FERC to promulgate rules that require electric utilities to purchase electricity from “qualifying cogeneration facilities and qualifying small power production … The Supreme Court has held, however, that “an agency’s decision not to take enforcement action should be presumed immune from judicial review under § 701(a)(2).” Heckler vl Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 833 (1985).

Asociacian De Reclamantes v. United Mexican States

561 F. Supp. 1190 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 20, 1983

Plaintiffs first seek to establish that their claims are a “usufructuary” interest 11 and thus a right in “immovable property.” … Clearly, such a holding distorts the doctrine whose application does not focus as much on the situs of property, but on whether a court in ordering relief would unduly interfere with the foreign affairs authority of the executive

United States v. Wilkerson

656 F. Supp. 2d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 22, 2009

clearly exculpatory and essential to a defense case.” … More doctrinally, too, the Ebron allegations do not hold up against well-established markers of importance.

Faison v. Government of the District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 15, 2009

Faison knew or reasonably should have known of the allegedly discriminatory action — she was not selected for a position for which she was qualified, and a younger, apparently less-qualified individual was selected in her … “Compliance with the statutory notice requirement is mandatory and a prerequisite to filing a suit against the District of Columbia ‘because it represents a waiver of sovereign immunity.’” Johnson v.

Nyunt v. Tomlinson

543 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2008

Hence, the Court will assume here that Nyunt has established a prima facie case of discrimination since the Board has conceded that Nyunt was qualified for each position and that each position was vacant. B. … Nyunt argues that the “suitably qualified” language clearly evinces Congressional intent for the Board to give a preference to qualified U.S. citizens when they are available for a vacant position regardless of the qualifications

Simpson Electric Company v. Seamans

317 F. Supp. 684 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 1970

This statement, however, must be read merely as a recognition that Seanwell had not established facts which would compel award of the contract to itself in the event the award to Cutler-Hammer should be declared void. … He was admittedly qualified in all other respects and it was illegal to award the contract to anyone else. No injunctive relief shall be granted.

TAXAY, MD v. United States

345 F. Supp. 1284 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 1972

Union Trust Company, 350 U.S. 907 , 76 S.Ct. 192 , 100 L.Ed. 799 (1955), which propose that the “discretionary function exception” does not grant a broad immunity to the government, but shields the government from suit for … The provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 1355 (a) which grants the Federal Aviation Administrator the power to “delegate to any properly qualified private person . . . any work, business, or function respecting (1) the examination,

Scinto v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2009

Such allegations are insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over non-resident BOP employees. … immunity.

Bancoult v. McNamara

370 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 21, 2004

Legal Standard for Immunity of Federal Officers Under the Westfall Act The Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act (‘Westfall Act”) generally confers upon all federal officers and employees immunity for … In harmony with established precedent, the D.C.

Rasul v. Bush

215 F. Supp. 2d 55 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 2002

As clearly set forth in the case, the Ralpho Court treated Micronesia as the equivalent of a United States territory, such as Puerto Rico or Guam. … Rejecting the plaintiffs argument that the United States had de facto sovereignty over the military base at Guantanamo Bay, the court wrote, “[bjecause the 1903 Lease of Lands Agreement clearly establishes Cuba as the de

Kaplan v. Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran

961 F. Supp. 2d 185 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 20, 2013

Analysis Under these principles, plaintiffs have alleged facts sufficient to establish standing. … PLAINTIFFS’ FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT CLAIMS FAIL The American plaintiffs assert claims under the updated state-sponsor of terrorism provision of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act against Iran, CBI and

Simon v. Republic of Hungary

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 30, 2021

Once that burden of production is met, however, “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.” … Opp’n at 25–26) or that those plaintiffs qualified for Czechoslovakian citizenship for some other reason and that the facts establish that the qualifications for that “other reason” are met.

Stephenson v. Simon

427 F. Supp. 467 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 12, 1976

Since ATF and its subdivisions are clearly not Government corporations, only the definitions of “Executive department” and “independent establishment” require examination. … Clearly, ATF cannot qualify under this term.

Jungquist v. Sheikh Sultan Bin Khalifa Al Nahyan

940 F. Supp. 312 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 20, 1996

Clearly, Sheikh Khalifa, as the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, would not condone or authorize the payment of moneys through the Abu Dhabi medical program as consideration for a promise from the plaintiff, inter alia, to keep … could fail to establish the occurrence of *319 an act of state.”

Vila v. INTER-AMERICAN INVESTMENT, CORP.

596 F. Supp. 2d 28 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 26, 2009

process” under the International Organizations Immunities Act (“Immunities Act”), 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b) (2006). … Moreover, other portions of the Thompsen opinion clearly support this Court’s interpretation of the ruling.