Case law

Belkin v. Islamic Republic of Iran

667 F. Supp. 2d 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2009

Jurisdiction The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) establishes the general principle that foreign states are immune from suit in United States courts. … The evidence also clearly establishes that the PIJ carried out the sequence of conduct that killed the decedent. See Clawson Report at 5-7. Dr.

Conservative Baptist Association of America v. Shinseki

42 F. Supp. 3d 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 16, 2014

"An organizational plaintiff . . . may have standing to sue on its own behalf 'to vindicate whatever rights and immunities the association itself may enjoy . . . .'" Common Cause v. Fed. … And any resources used in support of this litigation are "self-inflicted" costs and "cannot qualify as an injury in fact for purposes of standing." ASPCA, 659 F.3d at 25.

Marra v. Papandreou

33 F. Supp. 2d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 5, 1998

Forum Non Conveniens Local Rule 503(e) allows the court to set aside a magistrate judge’s determination upon a finding that such determination is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. As discussed above, the D.C. … In the July 29, 1998 Order, the magistrate judge permitted the plaintiffs to take limited discovery for the purposes of establishing personal jurisdiction and standing.

Nix v. Hoke

62 F. Supp. 2d 110 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 17, 1999

immunity.” … Hoke’s statement to Richard Hoke to suggest the violation of a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known”; indeed, Rep.

Steele v. Meyer

964 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2013

Under District of Columbia law, an employee’s scope of employment is determined by applying the test established in the Restatement (Second) of Agency. See Jacobs, 2013 WL 3835832, at *3. … “To qualify as conduct of the kind he was employed to perform the defendant’s actions must have either been of the same general nature as that authorized or incidental to the conduct authorized.” Council on Am.

Jacobsen v. Oliver

201 F. Supp. 2d 93 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 29, 2002

At the time, the availability of legal remedies was problematical, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1605 , (hereinafter “FSIA”) granted immunity from lawsuits to foreign states with only limited exceptions … See Flatow, 999 F.Supp. at 6 (noting “this Court’s special role in the development of foreign sovereign immunity jurisprudence”). B.

Johnson v. Louis Dejoy

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 17, 2024

Johnson makes only one other statement that could bear on whether she is a “qualified individual” for purposes of the Rehabilitation Act: she alleges that she was “otherwise qualified for her position, as evinced by her … Temporal proximity between protected activity and adverse action “is often . . . sufficient to establish the requisite causal connection for such claims,” Gleklen v. Democratic Cong.

Riegle v. Federal Open Market Committee

84 F.R.D. 114 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 26, 1979

Plaintiff recognizes that he cannot establish his standing to sue as a citizen by asserting a generalized abstract injury of constitutional dimension. Schlesinger v. … The legislative process continues to operate in unimpeded fashion; Congress’ power to require additional FOMC membership criteria re *116 mains clearly undiminished. See Reuss v.

Kilby-Robb v. Spellings

522 F. Supp. 2d 148 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 23, 2007

The Court concludes that plaintiff is unable to meet the second and fourth elements necessary to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. *157 First, plaintiff is unable to establish that she was in fact qualified … Kress’ bald *159 assertion does not establish that plaintiff was qualified for a grade 14 promotion.

Banks v. Lappin

539 F. Supp. 2d 228 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 22, 2008

It appears that his request to the LOC was so broad that it did not qualify as a proper request. Id. … It operates as a limited waiver of sovereign immunity, rendering the United States amenable to suit for certain, but not all, tort claims. See, e.g., Richards v.

Day v. D.C. Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs

191 F. Supp. 2d 154 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2002

These defendants move to dismiss the complaint, invoking the qualified immunity defense. … This issue, then, is clearly in dispute.

Onyewuchi v. Mayorkas

766 F. Supp. 2d 115 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 24, 2011

These assertions are clearly without merit. … The Plaintiff Was Required to Offer Statistical Evidence to Establish Causation To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment, the plaintiff must not only identify the challenged employment practice, but must also

Paavola v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 29, 2020

Thus, the only factor weighing clearly in favor of Tennessee is the place of the injury. … “case law establishes strict tests for [these] elements.” Id.

Adams v. Hodel

617 F. Supp. 359 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 1985

Clearly, nothing in this vague authorizing language requires the Secretary to use the traditional formula for calculating need under the General Assistance program — or, indeed, even to establish such a program. 9 Plaintiffs … No such clear disparity in allocation of funds has been established here.

Randall v. Howard University

941 F. Supp. 206 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 21, 1996

The defendant’s de minimis burden at the second step of the Tripartite Framework clearly has been met here. … Mekkawi is minimally qualified for her former position, he is less qualified than she. The plaintiff cites specific examples to establish that she was treated unfairly vis-a-vis other employees.

National Center on Missing & Exploited Children v. Horner

699 F. Supp. 333 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 7, 1988

The language of the regulation is clearly ambiguous. … Clearly this is not the case here.

Sakran v. Macy

218 F. Supp. 756 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 3, 1963

. § 2263 (a) provides that an annuitant is not barred by reason of his retired status from employment in any appointive position for which he is qualified. … If the annuitant fails to submit to examination as required under this section, payment of the annuity shall be suspended until continuance of the disability is satisfactorily established.” 5 U.S.C. § 2257 (c).

Hatfill v. Ashcroft

404 F. Supp. 2d 104 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 16, 2005

The individual defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Dr. … However, because the defendants' motion will be granted, the Court will not address the qualified immunity question. 7 .

Walther v. Federal Election Commission

468 F. Supp. 1235 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 17, 1979

In its first clause, section 441a(a)(5) establishes a general rule for all political committees. … Although section 441a(a)(5) clearly establishes a per se rule for unions and their locals as well as for the AFL-CIO and its local committees, there is no such special rule regarding the relationship between the AFL-CIO and

Doe v. Southeastern University

732 F. Supp. 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 1990

Section 12-301 of the D.C.Code establishes a one-year statute of limitations for libel, slander, assault, and other similar intentional torts. … Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides in pertinent part: “No otherwise qualified individual with handicaps in the United States, as defined in section 706(8) of this title, shall, solely by reason of her