Case law

NATIONAL ASS'N OF WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS v. Solis

665 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 27, 2009

ANALYSIS NAWE and Intervenors brought their claims under the APA, which waives the sovereign immunity of the United States and permits a court to set aside agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion … The right is qualified, however, and it may be overcome by an overriding interest in closure that is narrowly tailored to serve such overriding interest. Press-Enter. Co. v.

United States v. Wilkerson

656 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 10, 2009

Thus, unless the initial request for dismissal is transparent, the court will likely prove unable to establish conclusively the reasons underlying it. … As invoked in Brown , “any possibility” must be read to refer to some kind of qualified possibility.

Carson v. Sim

778 F. Supp. 2d 85 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 22, 2011

Although there were two vacancies, the jobs were given to two less-qualified employees with less seniority. This was an intentional interference with employee and union contracts. … Compl. ¶ 15), denied him entry into training programs that would qualify him for permanent promotion to positions to which he was temporarily appointed (Am.

Campbell v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2025

See Levitan, 281 F.3d at 1320 (noting that a plaintiff’s “beliefs must be sincere and the practices at issue must be of a religious nature” to qualify for First Amendment protection). … The Supreme Court has noted that “[s]tates are clearly entitled to assure themselves that there is an ample predicate for invoking the Free Exercise Clause” given the “difficulty of distinguishing between religious and

Dana Farber Cancer Institute v. Burwell

216 F. Supp. 3d 49 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 24, 2016

The Seventh Circuit concluded that “the [a]ccess payments clearly served to reduce related expenses, i.e., the [t]ax [a]ssessments, and therefore were appropriately offset . . . .” Id. … Laws Ann. ch. 118G, § 18 (“There is hereby established a . . . Trust Fund, which shall be administered by the [D]ivision. . . .

Center for National Security Studies v. United States Department of Justice

215 F. Supp. 2d 94 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 2, 2002

In order to accomplish that goal, the Act mandates “full agency disclosure unless information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language.” … Third, the other document disclosed to Plaintiffs clearly indicates the existence of earlier relevant documents, none of which were disclosed.

Dial v. Kane

District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2018

Although “Bivens establishes a cause of action for damages against a federal employee in his or her individual capacity for constitutional violations,” Davis v. … Corp., 534 U.S. at 72 (“If a federal prisoner in a BOP facility alleges a constitutional deprivation, he may bring a Bivens claim against the offending individual officer, subject to the defense of qualified immunity .

Spence v. McAleenan

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 15, 2020

The letter said that Spence was “no longer among the best qualified” and that a “better qualified applicant” had been selected. Id. … But it remains unsettled whether the ADEA waives sovereign immunity and authorizes disparate-impact claims against the federal government. Neither the Supreme Court nor the D.C. Circuit have addressed this question.

Melton v. United States

488 F. Supp. 1066 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 1980

On this issue of fact, the Court finds that the evidence does not establish contributory negligence. … A document signed by plaintiff specified that she “authorize[d] the RLA to obtain bids from qualified contractors in accordance with the applicable bid procedures of RLA.” 6 .

Vandivere v. Lynch

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 23, 2017

immunity protects all Defendants from liability. … Plaintiffs neither “make out a violation of a constitutional right,” nor demonstrate that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of [D]efendant[s’] alleged misconduct.” Pearson v.

Live365, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board

698 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 23, 2010

its constitutional challenge, without an injunction it will incur the expenses related to these activities without any potential of recovering them from the defendants due to the Eleventh Amendment’s grant of governmental immunity … While these expenses are likely to be substantial based on the plaintiffs representations, the Supreme Court has clearly held that this alone is insufficient to establish irreparable harm.

Teton Historic Aviation Foundation v. United States Department of Defense

917 F. Supp. 2d 129 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 18, 2013

Cir. 2012). 8 In keeping with these clearly-established principles, the Court notified the parties, well in advance of the hearing on the cross-motions for summary judgment, that it harbored concerns about Teton’s standing … To the contrary, Teton’s right to purchase those parts derived exclusively from its contract with GL, and the administrative record clearly and unambiguously establishes that GL canceled that contract years ago and fully

United States v. Boney

97 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 18, 2000

Circuit applied the standard for establishing juror impartiality to the context of the voir dire process. … In each instance, his participation included the protection of personal immunity.

Humane Society of the United States v. United States Department of Agriculture

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2021

An applicant must meet several criteria to qualify for a loan. “Primarily, the applicant must be the operator or owner/operator of a family sized farm.” Id. ¶ 50. … First, its declarations do not establish that borrowers customarily and actually treat their loan’s purpose as privileged and confidential.

American Immigration Lawyers Ass'n v. Reno

18 F. Supp. 2d 38 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 20, 1998

Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 739 , 92 S.Ct. 1361 , 31 L.Ed.2d 636 (1972)(“[A] mere ‘interest in a problem,’ no matter how longstanding the interest and no matter how qualified the organization is in evaluating the problem, is not … Plaintiffs, however, argue that Congress, by providing that the alien “may consult” with others, clearly recognized the importance of consultation during the process.

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Jamison

815 F. Supp. 454 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 1992

However, as the TRAC court wrote, “[wjhether or not these delays would justify mandamus, we believe they clearly warrant retaining jurisdiction.” TRAC, 750 F.2d at 81. … the qualified surface owner____ 82 While it is possible, as plaintiffs contend, that a surface owner who would otherwise be qualified might remain unknown to the Bureau, the occurrence of such an accident is highly speculative

Perkins v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs

754 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2010

However, plaintiff does not explain how his background in information technology qualifies him to perform statistical analysis, which is an entirely different subject matter. … However, his case is clearly distinguishable from other cases in which FOIA requesters successfully demonstrated their ability to disseminate information through news outlets and organizations.

Vento v. Internal Revenue Service

714 F. Supp. 2d 137 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 2, 2010

They were clearly compiled in the course of an investigation into plaintiffs’ tax liability. … Pre-decisional documents must also be deliberative to qualify for the privilege. Id.

K.W. v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · May 7, 2019

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 … K.W.’s parents can clearly and obviously invoke the stay-put provision.

Miniter v. Sun Myung Moon

736 F. Supp. 2d 41 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 7, 2010

Medical Center, 702 A.2d 207, 212 (D.C.1997) (ruling that forcing the plaintiff to work in an area where she was exposed to radiation while pregnant did not qualify as sufficiently outrageous conduct to support an IIED claim … The plaintiff has clearly alleged the existence of a valid contract. See Compl. ¶¶ 46, 49, 62-63, 67-68, 70, 82-83; see generally Pl.’s Opp’n to Times’s Mot.; Pl.’s Aff.