Case law

Smith Thee v. U.S. Secret Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 17, 2025

The Court will hereinafter adopt the plaintiff’s spelling of his name for the purposes of this Memorandum Opinion. 2 The plaintiff does not clearly allege Agent Plakas’s agency affiliation. See Compl. at 13. … Cir. 1983) (“Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing jurisdiction . . . and it must appear on the face of the complaint[.]”)).

Jerez v. Republic of Cuba

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2011

The foreign sovereign immunity defense is only available to an individual sued in his official capacity while the defense of qualified immunity may only be asserted by an individual sued in his personal capacity. Id. … ” but finding that “at the time of seizure it was not possible to establish a business in which the mark could be used and none was established.” ) Further, Jerez stated that the USPTO has a form, PTO-1594, which

Doe v. Sessions

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 12, 2018

Supp. 2d 198, 200 (D.D.C. 2006) (“[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.”). … Dated: December 12, 2018 RUDOLPH CONTRERAS United States District Judge qualified immunity, see, e.g., Williamson

Parisi v. Sinclair

774 F. Supp. 2d 310 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2011

. § 230 (b)(2)), by establishing immunity for internet publication of third-party content to require a fact-based analysis of if and when a defendant “adopted” particular statements and revoke immunity on that basis. … Sinclair’s book, which made allegations about a presidential candidate that were, in and of themselves, widely publicized, was clearly newsworthy.

Etzenhouser v. Vilsack

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 22, 2024

They also claim qualified immunity, but the Court need not address that argument given the posture and resolution of this case. … In response to a Rule 12(b)(1) motion, Plaintiffs have the burden to establish that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Berman v. Fed. Election Comm’n, No. 23-CV-01017, 2024 WL 3887373, at *2 (D.D.C.

Harper v. Miller

491 F. Supp. 217 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 1980

The Court ruled that Bruce was not entitled to absolute immunity under the standard established in Butz v. … In oral argument on another question several months later defendant Bruce requested permission to renew his motion for summary judgment on the question of qualified immunity.

In Re Lyons

148 B.R. 88 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 14, 1992

It is well established that exempt property is not protected from the enforcement of valid liens. … even if the plans qualify as spendthrift trusts.

Idrogo v. United States Army

18 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 6, 1998

NAGPRA clearly defines “Indian tribe” to mean “any tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community of Indians ... which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States … Accordingly, the Court dismisses the Plaintiffs’ § 1981 claim against the Department of the Army based on principles of sovereign immunity.

Gaskin v. May

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2023

To survive a Rule 3 12(b)(1) motion, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the court has jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. Lujan v. … Circuit precedent clearly forecloses this claim. See Abdelfattah, 787 F.3d at 536.

Hawthorne v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

702 F. Supp. 285 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 1988

Similarly, swearing to a criminal complaint is an integral part of the police function and, therefore, is clearly “governmental.” 829 F.2d at 74 . … Even assuming that this claim is actionable as defamation, it clearly relates to a discretionary decision on the part of WMATA officials about which “second-guessing” is not permitted; sovereign immunity thus attaches to

Tierney v. Town of Framingham

292 F. Supp. 3d 534 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 13, 2018

Therefore, this case clearly meets the three-part Younger test, and the Court will abstain from interfering with any ongoing state criminal proceeding. D. … Under the circumstances, such a conclusory and skeletal claim, not grounded in any established legal framework, is not sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Lucero-Nelson v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

1 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 24, 1998

WMATA was established by virtue of the Compact signed by Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, and agreed upon by Congress (“the Compact”). Pub.L. … Smith established that, in the absence of express statutory authority, a showing of “extraordinary circumstances” might warrant an award of punitive damages against otherwise immune municipalities. Id.

Palacios v. Spencer

267 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 18, 2017

Congress has, however, waived immunity for certain monetary claims in the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491. … Circuit has established two circumstances in which an agency’s denial of reconsideration qualifies as a final agency action.

Peroff v. Manuel

421 F. Supp. 570 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 27, 1976

outside of the protective scope of his immunity). … issue as to a material fact. 15 Yet this portion of plaintiff’s affidavit does not “set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence” as required by Rule 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because it is clearly

Fuld v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2024

(finding Dripps and Staller qualified to offer expert opinion on economic loss). Upon review, this Court, too, finds that Dripps and Staller are qualified to provide expert testimony on economic loss. 6 Compl. 37. … This is because terrorism is so clearly extreme and outrageous that it is often intended to inflict severe emotional harm even on those who were not present at the site of the act. Jd.

Al-Tamimi v. Adelson

264 F. Supp. 3d 69 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2017

One factor is the need to avoid making “an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion.” … However, the allegations in their Complaint clearly include conduct that occurred both before and after Abrams’s time at the White House.

Black Lives Matter D.C. v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 14, 2025

The Court found that the plaintiffs had alleged plausible claims of speech restriction and First Amendment retaliation, and that the defendant officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. Black Lives Matter D.C. v. … immunity.”

Local 2677, American Federation of Government Employees v. Phillips

358 F. Supp. 60 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 11, 1973

Sovereign Immunity The defendant argues that in reality these are unconsented suits against the United States which must be dismissed because of sovereign immunity. … Thus this suit clearly falls within the exception to the doctrine of sovereign immunity which allows suits against federal officials who have allegedly acted beyond their statutory powers or have exercised their statutory

Thornberry v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

535 F. Supp. 2d 154 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 7, 2008

Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss the complaint on the basis of sovereign immunity therefore is denied. B. … Elsea resides in the District of Columbia but claims that they “qualify” under the long-arm statute as employees of BOP. Pl.’s Opp. at 2.

Noble v. Claytor

448 F. Supp. 1242 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 13, 1978

would suggest that if the Congress intended § 2000e-16(b) to authorize CSC or the independent agencies to make fee awards, it knew how to accomplish that purpose, and the Congressional intent to do so would have been more clearly … It is a well established principle of statutory construction that Congress will not be presumed to have intended such an unjust result. See, e. g., Pennsylvania v.