Case law

Zeigler v. Potter

510 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 6, 2007

Zeigler also suffered from PTSD, that his symptoms were “quite severe,” and that everyday incidents “tend[ed] to trigger post traumatic reactions in him and he is driven to much avoidance behavior that is clearly maladaptive … A nonmoving party, however, must establish more than “the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence” in support of its position. Id. at 252 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 .

3883 CONNECTICUT LLC v. District of Columbia

191 F. Supp. 2d 90 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 2002

To have a property interest in a government benefit, “a person clearly must have more than an *94 abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. … There is no need to deal with Carlynn Fuller’s assertion of qualified immunity or with plaintiffs claim for punitive damages. The District’s motion for summary judgment will be granted.

Winternitz v. Syrian Arab Republic

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2022

The remaining question is whether Syria is entitled to immunity under the FSIA or another international agreement. … As a result, “a plaintiff that offers proof sufficient to establish a waiver of foreign sovereign immunity under § 1605A(a) has also established entitlement to relief as a matter of federal law” if the plaintiff is a citizen

Al-Aulaqi v. Obama

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 7, 2010

See Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 164 (explaining that "[t]he burden is on the 'next friend' clearly to establish the propriety of his status and thereby justify the jurisdiction of the court"). … -52- intentional infliction of emotional distress do not rise to the level of international torts that are "sufficiently definite and accepted 'among civilized nations' to qualify

Martinez Ramos v. Justin's Cafe, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 16, 2020

Plaintiff clearly qualifies as an “employee” under both statutes. See Compl. 11. … In addition, the well-pleaded allegations in the complaint establish that defendant Allison Kays qualifies as an “employer” under both laws. See Boland, 763 F. Supp. 2d at 67.

Sims v. Central Intelligence Agency

479 F. Supp. 84 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 13, 1979

That FOIA provision authorizes the withholding of “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” … Second, disclosure of the names of the researchers may constitute a “clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.”

Sickle v. Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions, LLC

17 F. Supp. 3d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 24, 2013

Under Rule 12(b)(1), the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the existence of jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Erby v. United States, 424 F. … Circuit has long held that Congress’s purpose in enacting the LHWCA and, by implication the DBA, was to provide employers with “general immunity” from employee tort suits for injuries covered by the workers’ compensation

Brown v. McHugh

972 F. Supp. 2d 58 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 2013

As part of the Army’s personnel system, it helps identify which officers are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of higher responsibility, as well as which officers should be kept on active duty, retained … United States, 723 F.Supp.2d 71, 79 (D.D.C.2010) (finding lack of subject matter jurisdiction to consider monetary damages claims against the United States brought under the APA because that statute does not waive sovereign immunity

Miller v. Department of the Navy

383 F. Supp. 2d 5 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 8, 2005

It is defendant’s claim that this information qualifies under Exemption 5 to FOIA, as clearly *18 constituting a “recommendation[ ] comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated. … reviewing court shall compel agency action when that action is deemed (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

Tequila Centinela, S.A. de C.V. v. Bacardi & Co.

242 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2007

“When good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of the matter of which an admission is requested, the party shall specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny the remainder.” … This is in violation of Rule 36 which, as aforementioned, clearly states that the answering party will “qualify or deny the remainder.” Fed.R.Civ.P 36(a).

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

US Inventor, Inc. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2024

The first request addressed inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings involving tribal sovereign immunity, id. ¶ 1, and the second addressed IPR proceedings involving state sovereign immunity, id. ¶ 4. … incorrectly withheld two forms that APJs submitted to claim production credit for work on cases under Exemption 6, which covers “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly

United States v. Zabavsky

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 2022

To start, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 U.S.C. § 242 give government officials qualified immunity if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … A plaintiff in a Section 1983 suit therefore must show that a right is “clearly established” by a federal court and cannot prove their case merely by eliciting testimony about “well established law enforcement standards.”

Pierce v. District of Columbia

128 F. Supp. 3d 250 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 11, 2015

Hearing is a “major life activity,” and deafness is clearly established as a disability. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A) (hearing is a “major life activity” pursuant to the ADA); 29 U.S.C. § 705(20)(B) (definition of “individual … The Record Shows That Pierce Needed An Interpreter The record here also clearly establishes that Pierce cannot communicate effectively in English, and thus no reasonable jury could find otherwise.

Newspaper Guild v. Saxbe

381 F. Supp. 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 23, 1974

“A court may qualify the plain meaning of a statute when its consequences— plainly absurd, inequitable, or in conflict with legislative history — permit the court to discern a clear legislative intention to the contrary.” … To understand clearly the defendant’s position and this court’s rejection thereof, it is important to relate briefly the background of the Newspaper Preservation Act.

Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice

516 F. Supp. 233 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1981

Disclosure of such information from these files would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy- In order for an agency to justify nondisclosure under Exemption 6, it .must first establish that the requested … Moreover, the decisions of this Court have established that information connected with professional relationships does not qualify for the exemption. Id.

OWNER-OPERATOR INDEPENDENT DRIVERS ASS'N v. Pena

862 F. Supp. 470 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 1, 1993

Circuit dismissed the petition as not qualifying for initial consideration by a court of appeals under the Hobbs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2342 . … Drivers of commercial vehicles are presently required to make routine stops at established weigh stations and other established check points to face investigations by state troopers.

Public Citizen Health Research Group v. Department of Health, Education & Welfare

477 F. Supp. 595 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 1979

The holding in Forsham that private medical centers receiving pure research grants lack the independent decisional authority to qualify as an agency is clearly distinguishable from the facts of this case. … Defendants have failed to establish the applicability of any exemptions claimed.

Stephenson v. Powell

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 24, 2018

The Board is a government body that enjoys sovereign immunity. Albrecht v. Comm. on Emp. Benefits, 357 F.3d 62, 67 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Fourth, all of Relators’ claims—both the FCA claims and any claims that Relators bring as plaintiffs on their own behalf—must be dismissed because they are clearly frivolous.

Brown v. Pro Football, Inc.

782 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 4, 1991

In the letter, Donlan concluded that “[f]or implementation purposes, the [developmental squad] issue is clearly at an impasse.” Id. … Such a provision is immunized only by the union’s consent.” Lock, The Scope of the Labor Exemption, 1989 Duke L.J. at 376.