Case law

Dahlman v. American Ass'n of Retired Persons (AARP)

791 F. Supp. 2d 68 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 2011

The American with Disabilities Act forbids employers from discriminating against qualified employees on the basis of their disability. 5 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (a). … Speiser, 670 F.Supp. at 385 (“While plaintiff clearly suffers from a legitimate mental illness, she has failed to demonstrate that it disabled her to the requisite degree.”); see also Gupta v.

Northeast Savings, F.A. v. Director, Office of Thrift Supervision

770 F. Supp. 19 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 16, 1991

Core capital is defined to include certain tangible and intangible components of capital other than goodwill, as well as certain “qualifying supervisory goodwill,” which is goodwill that existed on an eligible institution … While it is true that the Claims Court does not have jurisdiction to award relief for ‘unauthorized takings' because such actions are not the actions of the United States, FIRREA and its implementing regulations were clearly

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice

20 F. Supp. 3d 260 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 2014

Frontier Found., 739 F.3d at 10 (OLC opinion for FBI was deliberative because it did not establish “working law” of the FBI). … According to the plaintiff, these emails contain “undisputable evidence” “clearly show[ing] that a decision was made prior to June 14, 2012.” Id.

Clay v. District of Columbia

831 F. Supp. 2d 36 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 14, 2011

The Report has clearly identified the relevant version of the Complaint. Accordingly, this objection does not provide any basis for rejecting the Report’s conclusions. 2. … 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

Center for Auto Safety v. U.S. Department of Treasury

133 F. Supp. 3d 109 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2015

The EESA established the Office of Financial Stability (“OFS”), which implemented the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”). Id. … Nat’l Cmty. 12 Under what has been termed the “public-domain doctrine, materials normally immunized from disclosure under FOIA lose their protective cloak once disclosed and preserved in a permanent public record.”

Medical Imaging & Technology Alliance v. Library of Congress

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 21, 2025

Further, transformation is considered a matter of degree, but to qualify as a “transformative use” at all, the use of the original must “go beyond that required to qualify as a derivative” because the owner of a copyright … These concerns were thus addressed and rejected clearly in the record.

United States v. Dorman

294 F. Supp. 1221 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 19, 1967

App.D.C. 64, 190 F.2d 649 (1951), “such a waiver or consent must be proved by clear and positive testimony, and it must be established that there was no duress or coercion, actual or implied.” … The cases upholding searches based on valid consent are clearly distinguishable: Fredricksen v. United States, 105 U.S. App.D.C. 262, 266 F.2d 463 (1959); Woodard v. United States, 102 U.S.App.

Sage It, Inc. v. Cissna

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 22, 2018

H-1B visas permit qualified workers in specialty occupations to work in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(B). … Both of those contexts— sovereign immunity and the Armed Forces—are vastly different than the one presented here.

Curaflex Health Services, Inc. v. Bruni

899 F. Supp. 689 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 1995

Second, it has been established that both defendants Wha-ley and Dr. Bruni had knowledge of the PSSA and its terms. Third, it has been established that defendants Dr. Bruni and Mr. … It does not follow, however, that a corporate officer’s qualified privilege is always vitiated when he acts for his own pecuniary benefit or out of malice.

Management Information Technologies, Inc. v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

151 F.R.D. 471 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 8, 1993

Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 683 , 92 S.Ct. 2646, 2657 ,. 33 L.Ed.2d 626 (1972) (reporter has “no special immunity from the application of the general law”); Cohen v. … The need for the information is clearly outweighed by the rights to be protected.

Lin v. Meissner

855 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 14, 1994

In this letter, Senator Simon states, "although [Chinese who otherwise qualify for the protections we established against forced return should not be barred because they entered the United States without inspection], I cannot … Clearly, cases can and will be made on both sides of this issue.”

Doe Ex Rel. Tarlow v. District of Columbia

920 F. Supp. 2d 112 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 2013

Of course, even rights so fundamental as the right to have children are not absolutely immune from government infringement. … This is especially troubling as “[p]ersons who are mentally ill and incapable of giving informed consent to admission would not necessarily” qualify for involuntary commitment—they might, for instance, not be a danger to

Samuel Gruber Education Project v. United States Department of Justice

24 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 1998

Circuit properly rejected in King as “clearly inadequate.” King, 830 F.2d at 224. 6 943 F.2d at 978-979 . … by which the number of such documents can be compared to the remainder that did qualify.

Lu v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 2022

Circuit uses a “four-element test to determine whether a public employee has established a claim of retaliation in violation of his First Amendment rights.” LeFande v. … It therefore need not reach the argument that Lester and Whitescarver enjoy qualified immunity. Defs.’ Mot. at 60. B.

Katz v. National Archives & Records Administration

862 F. Supp. 476 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 2, 1994

The express purpose of the ARCA is to establish a comprehensive collection of assassination records for public access at the National Archives. Pub.L. … Plaintiff does not dispute that the autopsy records qualify as “similar files” or that the Kennedy family has a privacy interest in the records, limited, however, to preventing public disclosure that would cause clearly unwarranted

United States v. Ali

870 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 15, 2012

The evidence at issue qualifies in all regards, in that it 1) is relevant to 2) Ali’s intent, and 3) is sufficient to show that Ali committed the other acts in question. Id. … Again, however, the Court concludes that these misstatements and omissions were not material to the establishment of probable cause. Even the corrected affidavits would establish a sufficient nexus.

NORTHWEST AUSTIN MUN. UTIL. DIST. ONE v. Mukasey

557 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2008

None of these statements, however, even hints that political subdivisions outside section 14(c)(2)'s definition would qualify for bailout. … Following these cases, two statutes abrogating state sovereign immunity pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment survived constitutional challenges under the City of Boerne test. In Nevada Department of Human Resources v.

Jackson v. Executive Office for United States Attorneys

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 5, 2019

See Smith Decl. ¶¶ 3-11. 5 This information qualifies as “similar files” under Exemption 6. See Pinson v. Dep’t of Justice, 313 F. … The Court finds that the declaration adequately establishes that EOUSA has released all reasonably segregable information. III.

Mehta v. Syngenta Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · May 6, 2020

Mehta has failed to plead that she was an “employee” who qualified for benefits under the ASSLA. … Parr replaced her with a less-qualified Caucasian male. ECF No. 1-3 at 5-6. Although Dr.

Humane Society of the United States v. Vilsack

19 F. Supp. 3d 24 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2013

The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing standing. Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561. … Put another way: lobbying is what these organizations do, so being prompted to do it can hardly qualify as an injury that confers constitutional standing.