Case law

Soon Y. Park v. Howard University

881 F. Supp. 653 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 23, 1995

Eggleston was more qualified or what his qualifications were. Memorandum-Opinion at 6, ¶ 18. All of Dr. … Talang testified that plaintiff was well qualified for the position of Assistant Dean. Transcript of Trial at 425. She was a successful professor and had established an impressive relationship with her students.

Church of Scientology v. Internal Revenue Service

569 F. Supp. 1165 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 1983

The Court concludes, therefore, that these “post-index” documents clearly constitute return information within the statutory definition. … Even assuming, arguendo that section 6103 must be viewed as a qualifying exempting statute under 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(3), see e.g. Chamberlain v.

Ruffin v. New Destination, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 8, 2011

Plaintiffs contend that they are entitled to judgment against Defendants on their FLSA and DCWPCL claims because the undisputed facts clearly show that they were not paid wages owed to them. … The Court is persuaded that Plaintiffs qualified as employees under this “economic reality” test.

Pond v. Saul

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 5, 2023

Pond contends establishes a much more limited RFC. Pl.'s Mem. at 16-18. Dr. Jefferies opined that Ms. … Thus, the ALJ's RFC determination was clearly based on substantial evidence. IV. CONCLUSION Ms.

Udugampola v. Jacobs

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 8, 2011

Mezei, 345 U.S. 206, 210 (1953) (“[T]he power to expel or exclude aliens [i]s a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.”); Adams v. … Courts have therefore long-held that “[s]uch matters are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” Id.

Miller v. Gray

52 F. Supp. 3d 62 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2014

The plaintiff is currently seventy-two years old and avers he is “exceptionally well- qualified to teach.” Compl. ¶¶ 3-8. … This argument is foreclosed by well-established case-law.

Center for Democracy & Technology v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 11, 2020

It explains that § 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act—which, as relevant here, provides immunity from liability to online platforms for restricting some content on their sites—should be clarified. 1 Order 13,925 § … Circuit held that the groups’ “decision to expend more of its resources by participating in both . . . licensing proceedings is the type of alleged harm that we have repeatedly held does not qualify as an injury in fact

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 29, 2025

Those contentions 25 had gone so clearly without mention in the briefing that the court did not acknowledge them or any forfeiture issue at all in the original opinion … The rule is instead intended to help inspectors determine what qualifies as a violation in the first place.

Reep v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 23, 2018

The six-year statute of limitation period "must be strictly construed" because § 2401(a) "is a jurisdictional condition attached to the government's waiver of sovereign immunity." Id. … If privacy interests are identified, the burden shifts to the FOIA requestor to "establish a sufficientreason for the disclosure.

Loving v. Internal Revenue Service

917 F. Supp. 2d 67 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 18, 2013

The new regulations require each such preparer to pass a qualifying exam, pay an annual application fee, and take fifteen hours of continuing-education courses each year. … To initially register, a tax-return preparer must pay a fee and pass a qualifying exam. See 31 C.F.R. §§ 10.4(c), 10.5(b).

United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan v. Energy West Mining Company

District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2020

And the ultimate question is whether Energy West can “show[ ] by a preponderance of the evidence that the determination [of withdrawal liability] was unreasonable or clearly erroneous.” … No. 93-779, at 166 (1974), J.A. 1356 (“Since the desire of the United Mine Workers is to establish the pension plan as a qualified plan under section 401(a), the bill provides that section 404(c) is not to apply to the

Holz v. Westphal

217 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 12, 2002

Rather, in order to qualify for this exemption, a record must satisfy two criteria. See Doe v. FBI, 936 F.2d 1346, 1353 (D.C.Cir.1991). … Additionally, even if these circumstances are present, the record does not automatically qualify for amendment.

Coal River Mountain Watch v. United States Department of the Interior

146 F. Supp. 3d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 25, 2015

ousts this Court of its established authority to > hear the case. … This is clearly correct, as far as it goes.

Bobreski v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

284 F. Supp. 2d 67 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2003

Second, the plaintiff contends that EPA’s failure to comply with the ALJ subpoena amounts to an unlawful assertion of sovereign immunity. Id. at 11-13. … The text clearly does not grant the Secretary of Labor subpoena authority.

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Clinton

880 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 1995

Clinton established the Trust to help defray their legal expenses. … To qualify for Exemption 5, a record must meet a two-prong test.

Friendship Edison Public Charter School Collegiate Campus v. Nesbitt

704 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 2010

The court simply acknowledged that a lessor likelihood of success might suffice if each of the other three factors clearly favors granting the injunction.”). … Plaintiff cannot establish a strong likelihood of success. B.

United States v. McDonald

238 F. Supp. 2d 182 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 16, 2002

The actual amounts sold are functions of the evidence against each defendant but generally the government charges that the wholesale amounts were substantial and clearly not intended for personal use by the purchaser. … It is therefore no answer to say, for example, that if the defendant were before the court charged only with the individual count or counts in which he is named, he would qualify for release.

Carter v. Greenspan

304 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 19, 2004

Actions short of an outright firing can be adverse, but not all personnel decisions with negative consequences for the employee necessarily qualify as adverse actions. … Retaliatory termination Although termination from an employment position clearly constitutes an adverse personnel action for Title VII purposes, see, e.g., Burlington Indus., Inc. v.

Berry v. McCarthy

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 22, 2018

Though it did not expressly reconcile these competing points, the Board was evidently persuaded that the latter prevailed and established causation. It recommended that Berry be granted a Purple Heart. … Even if not clearly incorrect, the denial is at least on shaky ground. As the Corrections Board observed, injuries caused by taking cover are not precisely like the examples stated in the Army regulations.

Pollard v. Quest Diagnostics

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 17, 2009

To the contrary, as stated above, Quest has clearly explained that the Project Manager’s job was to “coordinate and maintain a new upgrade” to the LIS system. See Def.’s Stmt. ¶ 16 (emphasis added). … Accordingly, the Court cannot agree with Quest that Pollard has not established a materially adverse action.