Case law

Sataki v. Broadcasting Board of Governors

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 7, 2010

Well-established precedent further counsels that this Court should be reluctant to interfere with the personnel decisions of the federal government. … Plaintiff, however, has emphatically denied Defendants’ contention that she is not presently qualified to produce independent packages from Los Angeles.

Doe v. City of Boston

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 16, 2021

For qualifying “persons” thereunder, the long-arm statute enumerates seven types of contact with the District of Columbia that support the existence of personal jurisdiction against a defendant. See D.C. … Cir. 1990) (explaining that the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing personal jurisdiction). 2.

Harling v. Department of Veteran Affairs

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 2021

Here, the complaint clearly alleges that on September 9, 2016, plaintiff was seen at the VA Hospital in Washington, D.C. Compl. at 1. On or around that time, he was seen by two VA physicians. … The FTCA “waives the United States's sovereign immunity from tort claims and, subject to exceptions, renders the United States liable in tort as if it were a private person.” Gross v.

National Ass'n of Home Builders v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

297 F. Supp. 2d 74 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 24, 2003

That is, if a party pursuing a discharging activity — an activity that does not qualify for a NWP — applies for an individual permit and is rejected by the Corps, there is nothing that prohibits the party from challenging … In the end, as *82 the Supreme Court explained clearly in Lujan v.

Humane Society of the United States v. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 2019

And information about business judgments and relationships does not qualify for redaction. See Sims v. CIA, 642 F.2d 562, 575 (D.C. Cir. 1980). … The Service’s inspection reports are routinized oversight not necessarily related to an investigation of alleged wrongdoing, but they may nonetheless qualify as law enforcement records.

Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States

987 F. Supp. 2d 18 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 9, 2013

Order Establishing Interim Mitigation Measures, Ex. 4 to Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 20-4] at 2. … Order Establishing Interim Mitigation Measures, Ex. 5 to Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 20-5].

Herzfeld v. Barmada

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2025

Those sources and established D.C. precedent show why Rabbi Herzfeld’s claims fall short. … And although Defendants could have pressed this doctrinal point more clearly, they underscore that Rabbi Herzfeld voluntarily entered the noisy protest.

Uzoukwu v. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

27 F. Supp. 3d 62 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 21, 2014

With respect to DesJardin and Roberts, Plaintiff has clearly asserted facts that would support her retaliation claim. … maker, Plaintiff can establish retaliation.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. United States Section International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S.- Mexico

839 F. Supp. 2d 304 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2012

The email is also clearly deliberative. … In the court’s view, the Joint Expert Panel 15 Review is not only clearly predecisional, but deliberative as well.

American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Chao

298 F. Supp. 2d 104 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 22, 2004

The plain language of § 201(b) shows clearly that Congress gave the Secretary broad authority to require the filing of financial reports. … A union may choose to meet the trust disclosure requirement by submitting any one of the following: (1) a statement that a qualifying report has been filed with a separate government agency; (2) a copy of a qualifying independent

Conant v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

60 F. Supp. 3d 99 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 25, 2014

Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has not met his burden of establishing a claim of fraud. 4. … Nov. 14, 2013) (“The Court finds that this language clearly establishes Plaintiffs have no right to enforce the Consent Order against Defendant.”); Green v. Bank of America Corp., 530 Fed.

Micula v. Government of Romania, The

District Court, District of Columbia · May 18, 2015

Cir. 1978) (“[I]t is a well established principle that courts may look to subsequent legislation as an aid in the interpretation of prior legislation dealing with the same or similar subject matter.”). … The Foreign Arbitral Awards Convention enabling statute clearly demonstrates that when Congress wants to permit ex parte confirmation of a foreign arbitration award it knows how to do so.

Pescatore v. Pineda

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 1, 2018

Again, Olivia and Frank Sr. clearly suffered until at least 2016. … In cases brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. § 1605A, many district courts have followed the solatium damages model established in Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F.

Payne v. Kempthorne

899 F. Supp. 2d 42 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 21, 2012

Nor does it even discuss the legal standards governing hostile work environment claims; rather, Plaintiff states very clearly that “[t]his is a claim for retaliation” based upon specifically enumerated, discrete incidents … Relatedly, “[c]ourts cannot examine whether any isolated action, on its own, qualifies as ‘adverse.’

Arent v. Shalala

866 F. Supp. 6 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 11, 1994

The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing these elements. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, — U.S. —, —, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 2136 , 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). … Though Courts are not qualified to assess enforcement strategies, they are uniquely qualified to decide a legal challenge to an agency’s substantive statutory interpretation. Id.

Kendrick v. Bowen

657 F. Supp. 1547 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 15, 1987

While little else is clear in Establishment Clause case law, it is obvious.that the distinction between a challenge to a statute on its face and as applied has not been clearly delineated. … The AFLA is clearly devoid of the religious overtones associated with the Ten Commandments.

Steele v. United States

260 F. Supp. 3d 52 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 1, 2017

While it is true that they were issued separately and at different times, they are clearly interrelated. … The first objective clearly relates to the RTRP regulations regarding eligibility requirements for tax return preparers.

United States v. Williams

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 2011

. § 1512 were clearly incorrect.” Mot. at 1. Furthermore, Mr. Williams asserts that “appropriate jury instructions under Fowler would have resulted in an acquittal on Count Two.” Id. Consequently, Mr. … Williams argues that such agents do not qualify as federal law enforcement officers for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1512. According to Mr.

National Black United Fund, Inc. v. Campbell

494 F. Supp. 748 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 1, 1980

The Chairman interpreted the requirement to mean that in order to qualify for participation an organization must maintain chapters in all or nearly all states. … First, Cafeteria Workers dealt with the question of security on a military installation, a situation clearly distinguishable from the case at bar.

Healthalliance Hospitals, Inc. v. Sebelius

130 F. Supp. 3d 277 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 16, 2015

The intermediary’s calculation reduced Plaintiff’s qualifying available bed days below 100, thereby reducing Plaintiff’s DSH payment. Id. … The Secretary further argues that the 1985 switch to measuring “available bed days” over a cost reporting period was clearly intended to capture fluctuations in day-to-day usage and that the time in which an outpatient