Case law

Tmg II v. United States

778 F. Supp. 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 1991

Markowitz clearly fails to satisfy this standard. … This principle is clearly established under New York law, and the D.C. Court of Appeals has indicated that it accepts this principle as well. Nor is the D.C.

C & E SERVICES, INC. v. Ashland, Inc.

539 F. Supp. 2d 316 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2008

Ashland insists that, despite plaintiffs’ assurances to the contrary, plaintiffs are in fact attempting to use the settlement as proof of the validity of the government’s claim, which is clearly prohibited by the Rule. … The reports may instead be offered for the sole purposes of establishing the accuracy of what was told to plaintiffs by Ashland regarding the government investigation and audit, and to establish whether Ash-land was aware

Aliotta v. Bair

576 F. Supp. 2d 113 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 18, 2008

The plaintiff creates such an inference if he shows (1) he belongs to the statutorily protected age group; (2) he was qualified for his position and was performing his job well enough to meet his employer’s legitimate expectations … Clearly, the two groups are not so similarly situated as to support the proposition that the FDIC conducted the voluntary buyout, transfers and RIF as an elaborate ruse to flush the agency of senior staff. See James v.

Roberts v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 5, 2023

(collectively "English Family Member Plaintiffs"). 1 Although the Family Member Plaintiffs, as foreign citizens, do not qualify for the private right of action in 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c), a foreign state denied immunity … Bagot examined several legislative proposals for changes to the VOTCS-not yet enacted-and observed that "[t]he direction of travel is clearly towards a more victim orientated, flexible and generous approach.

Durso v. Napolitano

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 5, 2011

There, the FAA argued that “to qualify as an order, an agency decision must not only be final, but also ‘be accompanied by a record sufficient to permit judicial review.’” … Wash. 2005). 4 The inescapable-intertwinement doctrine applies only where a claim does not directly challenge the order in question; if it does, intertwinement is a moot point because § 46110 clearly

Rogler v. US Department of Health and Human Services

620 F. Supp. 2d 123 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 2009

It is part and parcel of her effort to obtain review of the alleged cabal at NIH, whose most basic goal was allegedly to establish “multi-faith chaplaincy” at NIH, i.e., “liberal Protestant chaplaincy.” … Rogler satisfied the Court that she qualified for IFP status and has proceeded without payment of court fees.

Nader v. McAuliffe

593 F. Supp. 2d 95 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 7, 2009

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 … And as to the latter, while the defendants concede that the state officials performed a state function by enforcing the states’ ballot access laws, they submit that these officials’ actions are protected by qualified immunity

Bishopp v. District of Columbia

602 F. Supp. 1401 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 1985

Plaintiff[s] merely need to establish facts adequate to permit an inference of retaliatory motive. … The institution of those charges was clearly protected activity. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3.

Allen v. Department of Defense

580 F. Supp. 74 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 4, 1983

In addition, the CIA argues that the documents are exempt from disclosure because they are “congressional” under the test established by this Circuit in Goland v. … In Goland the Court established a test for determining when congressionally generated or created documents, released to an agency for safekeeping, remained congressional documents immune from disclosure under FOIA.

Battles v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2019

This immunity applies except where expressly waived by statute, id., and Section 80 of the Compact, partially waives WMATA’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. D.C. Code § 9–1107.01(80). … Battles qualified as a regular employee rather than an “at-will” employee; therefore, his employment was terminable only for cause.

Theus v. Selene Finance LLC

98 F. Supp. 3d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 14, 2015

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Under Rule 12(b)(1), the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Lujan v. … See Pl.’s Affs. at 7 (“The entire foreclosure proceeding perpetrated against Plaintiff(s) and its consumer credit qualifies as a State Audit and Federal Investigation for accounting frauds in violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley

Iweala v. Operational Technologies Services, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 2009

In Egbuna, the Fourth Circuit held that a plaintiff is entitled to remedies under Title VII “only upon a successful showing that the applicant was qualified for employment.” 153 F.3d at 187. … OTS identifies no congressional action clearly intending to limit the scope of these broad statutes to exclude foreign nationals without proper work authorizations.

Career College Association v. Duncan

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 12, 2011

The HEA 2 also establishes that proprietary institutions of higher education and postsecondary vocational institutions qualify as institutions of higher education for … “Advertisers should not be permitted to immunize false or misleading product information from government regulation simply by including references to public issues.”

Park v. Howard University

863 F. Supp. 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 1994

Michigan Department of the Treasury, 489 U.S. 803 , 109 S.Ct. 1500 , 103 L.Ed.2d 891 (1989), in which the Supreme Court held that a state violates the constitutional doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity when taxing … The actions, noted in the Court’s opinion, clearly demonstrated that the conduct of Dr.

Dyson v. Winfield

113 F. Supp. 2d 44 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2000

Finding the testimony admissible, the circuit court stated that “a cause-effect relationship need not be clearly established by ... studies before [an expert] can testify that, in his or her opinion, such relationship exists … Dispenza’s .testimony clearly meets this threshold. B.

Wilson v. Nielsen

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 7, 2020

Wilson can establish that she was qualified for the position—a point the government agrees with, see, e.g., Def.’s SoF ¶ 4 (“[Wilson] was one of the 38 who were deemed qualified for the [GS-15 position].”). … Whether or not Taylor would have been the Court’s (or the jury’s) top choice, based on the summary judgment record, Wilson cannot establish that she was significantly better qualified for the job than Taylor.

Nerenstone v. Barr

784 F. Supp. 912 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 19, 1992

Plaintiff can establish his prima facie case by proving that he (1) belongs to the statutorily protected age group, (2) was qualified for the position, (3) was not given the position despite being qualified, and (4) a younger … He clearly needs to take a Dale Carnegie course in how to get along with others.

Alston v. District of Columbia

561 F. Supp. 2d 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 19, 2008

Similarly, the revocation of one’s accommodations qualifies as an adverse action. Woodruff, 482 F.3d at 529 . … While the court is not prepared to dismiss the claims against Janey, suffice it to say, because the District does not enjoy sovereign immunity or Eleventh Amendment protection, any remedies available from a suit against Janey

Zavadovsky v. Cheatle

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 27, 2025

Nor have Plaintiffs established the third provision. … The USSS has met the second prong by clearly identifying a pending law enforcement proceeding and demonstrating a risk of perceptible interference.

Woodruff v. NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER

505 F. Supp. 2d 138 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 2007

Although the letter clearly indicated that it was not a contract, it was a clear statement of NORC’s understanding of the terms of the employment contract. 2 Id. … By his own admission, Woodruff cannot establish the third and fourth elements necessary to sustain a claim for fraud.