Case law

Florida Rock Industries, Inc. v. Herrington

700 F. Supp. 605 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 1988

In response to these overcharges, restitutionary programs were established. … To adopt defendants’ conclusion that the letter stapled to the form did not qualify Tank Lines’ waiver and that its waiver could only be qualified if Tank Lines’ wrote on the actual form itself exalts form over substance.

American Civil Liberties Union, Inc. v. Jennings

366 F. Supp. 1041 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 14, 1973

The aims of the Act, although clearly of prime national concern, alone fail to provide satisfactory justification for the strained procedure established under Title I and its Regulations. … Clearly, any judicial attempt at statutory surgery could not rectify this impermissible scheme.

Ambar v. Federal Republic of Germany

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 2022

In its pending [9] Motion to Dismiss, Germany argues that it is immune from suit pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”). 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602–1611. … Based on the present record, the Court finds that Plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to establish both remaining prongs of the FSIA’s expropriation exception. A.

Cobell v. Norton

212 F.R.D. 24 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 23, 2002

Clearly, the most heightened duty of loyalty is the one that the fiduciary owes his or her beneficiary. Varity Corporation v. … The ease law clearly holds that when an attorney represents two parties who later become involved in litigation, neither party may assert the attorney-client privilege.”).

Arrington v. Group Hospitalization & Medical Services, Inc.

806 F. Supp. 287 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 20, 1992

The removed bone marrow, which would otherwise have been destroyed, is then restored, thus reinstating the patient’s immune and blood-forming systems to offset the chemotherapy’s effect, which would otherwise be fatal. … Clearly, then, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, not OPM, is the proper defendant in this action. B.

Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 2009

receipt of the proposal, approve the proposal and award the contract unless the Secretary provides written notification to the applicant that contains a specific finding that clearly … Rule 12(b)(1) Under Rule 12(b)(1), the party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court -- plaintiffs here -- bears the burden of establishing that the court has jurisdiction.

Kleinert v. Bureau of Land Management

132 F. Supp. 3d 79 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2015

11 nondisclosure, Exemption 7(C) is more protective of privacy than Exemption 6 and thus establishes a lower bar for withholding material.” … A court must first determine whether the records qualify as “personnel,” “medical,” or “similar files.”

Christian Civic League of Maine, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission

433 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 9, 2006

Finally, the League has failed to establish that “the public interest would be furthered by the injunction.” CityFed Fin., 58 F.3d at 746. … The Commission argues that, in order to establish its standing, the League must seek an advisory opinion from the Commission on whether it nonetheless qualifies as an MCFL organization, thereby obviating any occasion for

United States v. House of Representatives of United States

556 F. Supp. 150 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 3, 1983

In addition, defendants claim that they are immune from suit under the Speech and Debate Clause, Article I, § 6, cl. 1. Plaintiffs have addressed and opposed each of these threshold challenges. … Defendants, however, have indicated a preference for established criminal procedures in their motion to dismiss this case.

Wheeler v. Doe

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 24, 2025

Although “pro se complaints are held to a less stringent standard than other complaints, even a pro se plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the court has subject-matter … Claims qualify as “patently insubstantial” if they rely on “any bizarre conspiracy theories” or “any fantastic government manipulations of [a plaintiff’s] will or mind.” Best, 39 F.3d at 330.

Reese Brothers, Inc. v. United States Postal Service

905 F. Supp. 2d 223 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 27, 2012

sent by qualified nonprofit organizations in 1951. … Such a claim, if true, could well establish a lack of reasoned decision- making.

Davis v. Islamic Republic of Iran

882 F. Supp. 2d 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2012

Their action is brought pursuant to the state-sponsored exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330 , 1602 et seq., which was enacted as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for … Thus, in Murphy this Court applied the ratio of $3.44 established in Valore — an earlier FSIA case arising out of the Beirut bombing.

Cobell v. Babbitt

91 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 21, 1999

Waiver of Sovereign Immunity Because plaintiffs bring their lawsuit against federal officials, plaintiffs must prove a clear waiver of sovereign immunity that covers the substantive claims and remedies that they seek. … FF/CL, at 2 (“The trust for individual Indians is clearly a trust within the terms of Mitchell II.”). This approach must be rejected.

Boyar v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd.

954 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 6, 1996

In each of these cases, the expert’s calculations were based on facts that were clearly contradicted by the evidence. … Borzilleri’s assumption based on those facts is not clearly speculative, and KAL’s motion must be denied. III.

Saddler v. Amec Foster Wheeler Environment and Infrastructure, Inc.

253 F. Supp. 3d 210 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 26, 2017

Cir. 1989) (“[T]he Supreme Court has clearly instructed that Colorado River may not be invoked as a means of getting rid of cases that properly belong in federal court.”). … Reference to regulations to establish a per se duty, however, is not unusual, see, e.g., Gadaire v. Orchin, 197 F.

Patel v. Bureau of Prisons

125 F. Supp. 3d 44 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 21, 2015

Given the availability of qualified immunity, it would be anomalous if actual government officials were wholly immune from personal liability for even clear RFRA violations while private citizens “acting under color of … BOP’s current showing is insufficient to establish that the document in question is privileged.

Etheridge v. Fedchoice Federal Credit Union

789 F. Supp. 2d 27 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 2, 2011

Plaintiff has clearly established, and Defendant does not challenge, that her plantar fasciitis was a medical impairment “of central importance to daily life,” namely, her ability to stand and walk. … While Plaintiff does not provide any authority establishing that an impairment such as hers, lasting at most for 8 months, qualifies as a disability under the ADA, there is ample case law establishing that Plaintiffs medical

Walker v. Dalton

94 F. Supp. 2d 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 8, 2000

Specifically, a plaintiff who has been denied a competitive promotion must demonstrate the following to establish a pri-ma facie case: “(1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he applied for and was qualified for an … Viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the evidence establishes that (1) plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) he applied for and was qualified for the available WS-15 position; (3) despite his qualifications

National Star Route Mail Contractors Association, Inc. v. United States Postal Service

223 F. Supp. 3d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 2016

It is well settled that the Government has waived its immunity from suit against the Postal Service. … 19 Postal Service’s immunity from suit. 39 U.S.C. § 401(1).

9ren Holding S.A.R.L. v. Kingdom of Spain

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 15, 2023

Finally, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) provides that foreign states are immune from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts unless they fall within certain exceptions. … If Plaintiff meets its burden, then 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.” Id.