Case law

Epstein v. Geren

539 F. Supp. 2d 267 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 25, 2008

It is well-settled that to rebut this presumption, a plaintiff must establish through “cogent and clearly convincing evidence” that the agency’s findings were arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial evidence, or … The parties do not clearly identify this individual in their briefings. 4 .

Talbott v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2025

The moving party “bears the burden of establishing that changed circumstances warrant relief.” Am. Council of the Blind. v. Mnuchin, 878 F.3d 360, 366 (D.C. … For this reason, Defendants “cannot immunize [themselves] from violating” the Fifth Amendment “by discriminating against only a subset of” transgender persons. Id.

Sack v. Central Intelligence Agency

49 F. Supp. 3d 15 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 17, 2014

It too qualifies as an Exemption 3 statute. Weissman v. CIA, 565 F.2d 692, 694 (D.C. Cir. 1977). … Supp. 2d 92, 99 (D.D.C. 2011) (“‘Under the public-domain doctrine, materials normally immunized from disclosure under FOIA lose their protective cloak once disclosed and preserved in a permanent public record.’”)

Harris v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 1, 2021

E (NGRI Patient Court Transport Policy), at 4.11 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s reliance on the Costa cases is misplaced because the policy in this case was clearly approved internally. … Plaintiff challenges Defendant’s expert on three grounds: (1) Defendants’ expert is not qualified to opine on the appropriateness of the use of restraints on Plaintiff during transport because he is not a “qualified medical

United States v. Hardy

263 F. Supp. 3d 244 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2017

To establish deficient performance under Strickland, a defendant must show that “counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688. … Accordingly, defendant’s counsel’s performance in recommending that he enter into the plea agreement was clearly not deficient, precluding any claim for ineffective assistance.

Budik v. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center

937 F. Supp. 2d 5 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 5, 2013

The FTCA does not waive sovereign immunity for “[a]ny claim arising out of . . . libel [or] slander.” 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h). … Cir. 1991)). 9 Here, the plaintiff’s own allegations establish that no government action deprived her of potential employment with Dartmouth-Hitchcock.

Ward v. Shinseki

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 19, 2012

Ward is still interested, she should contact the Department and they “will begin the process of establishing your work- from-home arrangement.” (Dkt. No. 25, Ex. 24). … Ward abandoned the interactive process, she had yet to produce medical information clearly indicating her ability to do all of the tasks required of her. The information Ms.

United States v. King

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2023

statute. 3 Further militating in favor of a more expansive reading of section 2252(b)(2) is the fact that, when Congress intends to “reference only state law congruent with federal law,” it typically does so “clearly … See id.; see also Mayokok, 854 F.3d at 992 (comparing Minnesota statute to definition of child pornography 15 established by 18 U.S.C. §§ 2256(8)(A) and 2256(2)(A));

Sloan v. URBAN TITLE SERVICES, INC.

770 F. Supp. 2d 227 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2011

to establish the appropriate professional standard, to establish a deviation from that standard, and to establish that such a deviation was the proximate cause of the claimed damages." … If Jacobs intends to testify as to all the matters set forth in his expert report, Duncan is clearly correct.

Porter v. Leavitt

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 13, 2009

regarded as having such an impairment.” 29 U.S.C. § 705(20)(B) (referring to ADA definition); see 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) (ADA definition of disabled individual).7 Plaintiff states that she has neurological and immune … When a qualified individual with a disability is in need of an accommodation, the individual’s employer should engage in an “informal, interactive process [with the individual] . . .

Chan v. Bell

464 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 1978

. § 1151 (b) provides that “immediate relatives” of United States citizens, defined to include spouses, who are otherwise qualified for admission as immigrants shall be admitted as such, without regard to other, ordinary … The Immigration and Naturalization Service clearly could not, consistently with due process of law, be regarded as vested with both the authority to establish the vague and elusive concept of marriage viability and the enormous

United States v. Libby

498 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 21, 2007

V), qualified as a principal or inferior officer for Appointments Clause purposes. 14 Morrison, 487 U.S. at 670-73 , 108 S.Ct. 2597 . … They do not confer upon Fitzgerald as Special Counsel the prosecu-torial equivalent of James Bond’s license to kill, and are unlikely to be read by any court as a blank check “permitt[ing][him] to ignore well-established

Carr v. District of Columbia

565 F. Supp. 2d 94 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 2008

These kinds of generalized statements are legally insufficient to establish probable cause. See Barham, 434 F.3d at 574 . … In determining whether Assistant Chief Newsham was entitled to qualified immunity for ordering the arrests, the D.C.

Clemmons v. Academy for Educational Development, Inc.

70 F. Supp. 3d 282 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2014

The people who were involved with such actions have been formally addressed, very clearly and directly. … Clemmons has established racial discrimination.

Deese-Laurent v. Real Liquidity, Inc.

305 F. Supp. 3d 280 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2018

to assert, by way of a motion, as a defense, or otherwise in any such suit, action or proceeding, any claim that it is not subject personally to the jurisdiction of the above-named courts, that its property is exempt or immune … Where plaintiff's interests are derivative of Vineyard's, it is clearly foreseeable that he is as subject to the NPA's forum-selection clause as were the entities he managed. See id. at *9 . IV.

United States v. Kelly

District Court, District of Columbia · May 2, 2023

that, despite the fact that the jury selection statute only disqualified those “under sentence” at the time of jury selection, because the procedural rules “require ‘a court to excuse a juror whenever a challenge for cause clearly … Defendant does not dispute that he was convicted of a crime punishable by more 15 Evidence of a crime for which a “dishonest act or false statement” must be established to secure conviction always must

Mikhashov v. Department of Defense

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2024

Neither party addresses these factors, but both are clearly met in this case. … “Those sworn statements sufficiently establish that no portions of the withheld documents may be segregated and released.”

Montgomery v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2022

The Court dismissed Montgomery’s suppression of exculpatory evidence claim since Montgomery had not demonstrated that there is a clearly established right to receive exculpatory evidence prior to a preliminary detention … Part of the reason for this consensus is that “the statutory language of Title II establishes two separate circumstances under which a qualified individual with a disability might have a claim against a public entity.”

Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran

220 F. Supp. 3d 98 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 6, 2016

The court’s order created a qualified settlement fund (QSF trust) and transferred the seized funds to a trustee_the Honorable Stanley Sporkin_for the benefit of the plaintiffs. … This is insufficient to establish an underlying attorney-client agreement justifying a charging lien.

Temme v. Esper

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 19, 2020

It then found that the records failed to establish that “the elbow ailment for which he was [ ] treated was proximately related to the injury he received two months earlier.” J.A. at 10 ¶ 2.c. … And, third, he maintains that the Board “ignored specific language within AR 600-8-22 2-8 . . . , which states that injuries caused by enemy placed mines or traps ‘clearly justify award of the Purple Heart.’” Id.