Case law

Service Employees International Union, Local 82 v. District of Columbia Government

608 F. Supp. 1434 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 10, 1985

Although plaintiff did not raise a privileges and immunities clause challenge to the regulations, the "mutually reinforcing relationship between the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, § 2, and the Commerce Clause … Clearly, the District has the authority to impose a complete ban on all vending on public property.

Carey v. Federal Election Commission

864 F. Supp. 2d 57 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2012

EMILY’s List, 581 F.3d at 15 n.7. 3 Independent expenditures are “expenditure[s] by a person – (A) expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate; and (B) that [are] not made … LEGAL STANDARD To qualify for an EAJA award, a plaintiff must establish that he was the prevailing party; the burden then shifts to the government, which may avoid paying an EAJA award if its position was

Stone v. Walsh

756 F. Supp. 2d 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 6, 2010

any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Tuttle, 471 U.S. 808, 823 , 105 S.Ct. 2427 , 85 L.Ed.2d 791 (1985) (plaintiff must show course deliberately pursued by city establishing affirmative link between city’s policy and alleged constitutional violation).

Akosile v. Armed Forces Retirement Home

938 F. Supp. 2d 76 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 11, 2013

A court cannot find that the United States has consented to be sued unless Congress has clearly and unequivocally waived the United States’ immunity. Mitchell, 445 U.S. at 538 (citation omitted). … Since the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for libel claims, the plaintiff’s libel claim is barred.

Haygan v. United States

627 F. Supp. 749 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 7, 1986

SECURITY IS A DISCRETIONARY FUNCTION AND THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT BARS CAUSES OF ACTION BASED ON FAILURE TO PERFORM DISCRETIONARY FUNCTIONS The FTCA does not waive the federal government’s immunity for claims based on … The “discretionary function” exemption “includes determinations made by executives or administrators in establishing plans, specifications, or schedules of operations.

Lane v. Vasquez

961 F. Supp. 2d 55 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 12, 2013

and selectee is “inherently indicative of discrimination.”69/ This disparity of qualification is evidence when the plaintiff is “markedly more qualified,” “substantially more qualified,” or “significantly better qualified … interviewed for PC3-020.101/ Second, White’s poor employer reference does not sufficiently create the kind of disparity that shows inherent discrimination.102/ And, more importantly, Lane never offers evidence that he was clearly

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.

Broidy Capital Management LLC v. Muzin

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 2, 2022

And they lack “conduct-based immunity” because the State Department never granted them a suggestion of immunity, because the State Department lacks an “established policy” of recognizing immunity in similar circumstances … It is also consistent with the law of sovereign immunity, as discussed above, under which an entity’s immunity from discovery is generally coextensive with its immunity from suit.

Alberts v. HCA Inc. (In Re Greater Southeast Community Hospital Corp. I)

365 B.R. 293 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 6, 2006

Davis, 264 U.S. 456, 462 , 44 S.Ct. 364 , 68 L.Ed. 788 (1924) (“an action on behalf of the United States in its governmental capacity ... is subject to no time limitation, in the absence of congressional enactment clearly … But the IRS did not need to hold a matured claim against Michael Reese to qualify as a creditor on the petition date.

Texas Border Coalition v. Chertoff

District Court, District of Columbia · May 15, 2009

[and in doing so] seeks not to establish the government's liability for damages, but to prevent the government from taking his property at all." … For the Court to second-guess the Secretary's decision, it would have to make "policy determination[s] of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion" and thereby disregard the "respect due coordinate branches of government

Gordon v. Office of the Architect of the Capitol

928 F. Supp. 2d 196 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 8, 2013

The Ricks rule resists clearly-defined standards, and its application must be considered afresh in each case. … At best, the plaintiff has demonstrated that she is equally qualified or conceivably slightly more qualified than Camera for the position.

Sanford v. Howard University

415 F. Supp. 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 1976

A brilliant, exceptionally qualified black student was given course credit without an examination. … Also clearly in point is the holding of another circuit in an opin *30 ion by Judge Stevens, now Mr.

Smith v. Chamber of Commerce of United States

645 F. Supp. 604 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 1986

Defendant has moved for summary judgment on the grounds that first, plaintiff fails to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, and second, even if plaintiff has established a prima facie case, defendant has articulated … Regardless of whether plaintiff could have presented a prima facie case, summary judgment clearly is warranted on his ADEA claim as defendant has fulfilled its burden of producing evidence showing that plaintiff was terminated

Bowie v. Ashcroft

283 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 22, 2003

The remaining two claims, each of which allege discrete discriminatory and retaliatory acts, are dismissed because the plaintiff *35 clearly failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. … It is not clear from the record whether these temporary assignments entailed additional pay or whether there was any established process by which qualified candidates could apply to be considered for these assignments. 2

Horizon Lines, LLC. v. United States

414 F. Supp. 2d 46 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 10, 2006

Vessels meeting the requirements of § 883 are referred to as “Jones Act qualified.” … CBP seized on this supposition in rejecting plaintiffs petition for reconsideration to and jumped to the conclusion that, “as the STB opinion clearly states, ...

Dorsey v. Jacobson Holman, PLLC

707 F. Supp. 2d 21 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 27, 2010

QUESTION: What do I do if I think I qualify for the COBRA premium reduction but my plan tells me I do not? A. … Exhaustion is excused if a litigant's interest in an immediate judicial forum clearly outweighs the institutional interests underlying the exhaustion requirement. McCarthy v.

Hinton v. Unity Health Care, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 5, 2009

Thereafter, on July 22, 2009, HHS denied Plaintiff’s administrative complaint, concluding that “[t]he evidence fails to establish that the alleged injuries were due to the negligent or wrongful act or omission of a federal … Pl.’s Opp’n at 3 (asserting that the United States “clearly inhibited Plaintiff’s diligent efforts to totally exhaust his administrative remedies”).

Myers v. District of Columbia Housing Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2021

Second, the headline clearly reads, “Public Housing Tenants Sue D.C. Housing Authority, Property Manager for Sexual Harassment.” Id. (emphasis added). … Proper Attribution to a Qualified Government Source Oliver also argues that the fair report privilege cannot apply to the Relman Post because a complaint is not a qualified government source.

Duffy v. Jones

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2020

Cir. 1992), establish that the Court has jurisdiction. The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. See Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561 (1992). … And, second, has Congress waived the United States’s immunity to suit?” Id.

Guevara v. Ischia, Inc.

47 F. Supp. 3d 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 6, 2014

A non-moving party, however, must establish more than the "mere existence of a scintilla of evidence" in support of its position. Id. at 252. … All of these facts strongly suggest that Testa qualifies as an individual "employer" under the FLSA and the DCMWA.