Case law

Dorsey v. Jacobson Holman, Pllc

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 27, 2010

Termination of employment that would result in loss of health insurance constitutes such a qualifying event. 29 U.S.C. § 1163. … Dorsey suggests that she did contact DOL before the appeal process was established and that should suffice.

Singh v. Tillerson

271 F. Supp. 3d 64 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2017

Matters of “policy toward aliens are . . . so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” Id. at 1159 (quoting Harisiades v. … The letters explaining the January 2017 denials clearly indicate that the consular officer based the denials on a review of school records, medical reports and other documents, as well as interviews with the applicants

McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriott Services, Inc.

349 F. Supp. 2d 30 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 20, 2004

The party offering the expert’s testimony must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the expert testimony is admissible and that the expert is qualified. … A(2) at ¶ 1), Siskin need not personally be an expert in STATA in order to be a qualified expert under Daubert .

Sargent v. Paine Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc.

687 F. Supp. 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 10, 1988

Plaintiff Sargent’s efforts to comply with 9 U.S.C. § 12 would qualify for this exception. … The Court upholds its position that for judicial review to be meaningful, an arbitrator’s award cannot be absolutely immune from scrutiny. See Siegel v.

Big Mama Rag, Inc. v. United States

494 F. Supp. 473 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 1979

(BMR), qualifies as a tax-exempt organization under the terms of 26 U.S.C. §' 501(c)(3) (1976). … The administrative record clearly establishes: (1) that BMR is not designed or intended to make a profit, Rec., Tab 11, at 10, although it does hope to become self-supporting; (2) that it is currently operating with a nearly

Federal Election Commission v. Craig for U.S. Senate

70 F. Supp. 3d 82 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2014

So, they have no grounds to complain about the FEC’s over-inclusiveness or lack of precision, and they did little to carry their burden to establish the amount of the legal expenses that qualified for at least partial payment … Qualified, 1991 WL 241892, at *2.

Powell v. Marsh

560 F. Supp. 636 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1983

It is well established that the ABCMR’s decision to grant an oral hearing is purely discretionary. 32 C.F.R. § 581 .-3(c)(5) (1975). See also Knehans v. … The ABCMR’s action clearly meets this standard in the case at bar. It is undisputed that plaintiff is now suffering from a serious illness. However, that is not the question here.

Quarles v. General Investment & Development Co.

260 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 10, 2003

[and][5] otherwise prohibiting, based on their race, qualified past and current qualified African-American employees from advancement in the defendants’ corporations. … Clearly, according to Ms.

CSX Transp., Inc. v. Healey

327 F. Supp. 3d 260 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 10, 2018

Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act Congress enacted the first version of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act in 1938 to establish a system of unemployment insurance for covered employees. R.R. Ret. Bd. v. … This Court disagrees with the conclusion of that court that the RUIA preemption provision "does not clearly define the type of sickness provisions RUIA preempts" which led that court to rely on the legislative history to

Republican National Committee v. Pelosi

District Court, District of Columbia · May 1, 2022

As the Framers intended, House Defendants are immune from suit under the Speech or Debate Clause. … Second, for the RNC to prevail on most of its claims against Salesforce—each of which challenges the subpoena issued by the Select Committee—it would need to establish that Salesforce qualifies as a “state actor” for purposes

Webster v. MicroLink, LLC (In Re NETtel Corp.)

323 B.R. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 8, 2005

(As will be seen, Webster contends that because the payments were for services rendered prior to the preference period, they do not qualify for application of the § 547(c)(4) exception, but the court concludes that if the … a “critical vendor” order (as an incentive to continuing postpetition performance by the creditor), that payment would make § 547(c)(4) inapplicable to any prepetition new value if such a “critical vendor” payment were immune

Bent v. Talkin

280 F. Supp. 3d 107 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2017

Plaintiff Fails to Establish a Likelihood of Success on the Merits The most fundamental reason that Plaintiff’s Application for preliminary injunctive relief will be denied is that he has not established a likelihood … This is clearly a weighty and legitimate public interest.

United States v. Buchanan

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 14, 2025

Once properly qualified as an expert in that field, Dr. … Johnson to testify at trial and qualifies him as an expert in general-practice psychiatry, Dr.

PATCHAK v. Salazar

646 F. Supp. 2d 72 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 19, 2009

In an effort to sidestep this paucity of *78 evidence, plaintiff alleges instead that he has a general interest in ensuring that only qualified tribes receive benefits under the IRA. … Indeed, this Court has held at least twice that merely being a taxpayer is insufficient to establish prudential standing under the IRA. Sault Ste. Marie v.

Styrene Information and Research Center, Inc. v. Sebelius

944 F. Supp. 2d 71 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 15, 2013

And the HHS has promulgated no regulation establishing legal criteria for the Expert Panel’s peer review process. … But there is nothing arbitrary about having experts review only the data that they are qualified to analyze.

Smith v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2022

Thus, “the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.” Moran v. U.S. Capitol Police Bd., 820 F. Supp. 2d 48, 53 (D.D.C. 2011) (citing Lujan v. … Sovereign immunity bars civil actions against the United States unless its immunity is waived. See United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 212 (1983).

United States v. Alazo

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 14, 2023

§ 112(a) in Count One qualifies as a crime of violence under section 924(c)(3)(A). … “Although a common-law term of art should be given its established common-law meaning . . . we do not assume that a statutory word is used as a term of art where that meaning does not fit.

Butler v. Sebelius

842 F. Supp. 2d 273 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 8, 2012

Evidence that Plaintiff was better qualified, however, does not suffice to support an inference of discrimination; rather, a jury must be able to find Plaintiff was “significantly better qualified for the job” than Wade … Credibility of Explanation Plaintiff next argues that, “[w]hile establishing that an employee is demonstrably more qualified than the selectee is one way of demonstrating pretext, it is not the only way.”

Nitterright v. Claytor

454 F. Supp. 130 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 1978

position and was found “highly qualified.” … Relying on the doctrine of sovereign immunity, defendant opposes an award of prejudgment interest.

Shafiiq v. Obama

951 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 5, 2013

Detainees at Guantánamo and their lawyers have great difficulty communicating, visiting, and, most of all, establishing mutual trust. … Establishing [redacted] as the diary's author supports Mr. Barhoumi's argument that he was not “part of” Zubaydah’s forces because, according to Mr.