Case law

Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities v. Duncan

110 F. Supp. 3d 176 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 23, 2015

But the reader will search in vain for these qualifying words in the Association’s cited provisions from elsewhere in the Act. … The Association says yes, reasoning first that the certifications are arbitrarily (even unconstitutionally) vague, “because they fail to define clearly which licensure requirements any given program must satisfy.”

Lemmons v. Georgetown University Hospital

431 F. Supp. 2d 76 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 4, 2006

In response, the plaintiff argues that summary judgment is improper because “the undisputed facts on the record ... clearly show that [she] was discriminated against because of her race and has been subjected to a pattern … Because the Court concludes that the plaintiff plainly fails to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, it need not consider whether or not the actions at issue qualify as “adverse.” 14 .

Keister v. Aarp Benefits Committee

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 7, 2019

AARP Benefits is also plainly covered by the Release that Keister signed if it qualifies as an administrator of one of AARP’s “employee benefit programs[.]” (Release at 3, ¶ 2.) … Additionally, Keister’s ERISA claim clearly falls outside the exceptions listed in the second sentence of the Release’s exclusions provision.

Eley v. Stadium Group, LLC

236 F. Supp. 3d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 17, 2017

Then, “[o]nce a bona fide dispute has been established, the court must consider whether the agreement reflects a reasonable compromise of disputed issues [rather] than a mere waiver of statutory rights brought about by … These disputes clearly demonstrate that bona fide issues exist regarding both Plaintiffs’ entitlement to any additional compensation at all, and also the amount of wages, if any, that Defendants owe to them.

Magassa v. Transportation Security Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2022

Magassa does not challenge whether Section 114(r) qualifies as an exemption holding statute. See generally Pl.’s Opp’n, ECF No. 10. … Exemption 6 exempts from disclosure “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6).

Shurtleff v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

991 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2013

Bush established for the purpose of developing a national energy policy. … The Plaintiff maintains that the EPA’s representations do not satisfy its burden of establishing that the records are properly withheld because the Agency has failed to establish that the communications were confidential

United States v. Hunton & Williams

952 F. Supp. 843 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 3, 1997

First, the statutory law, legislative history and ease law clearly establish that the OIG has the authority to audit and investigate outside contractors in order to detect fraud and/or abuse. … These cases are clearly distinguishable from this case.

Icc Evaluation Service, LLC v. International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 2022

“Deceptive, illegal or fraudulent activity simply cannot qualify for protection as a trade secret.” Goodman v. Genworth Fin. Wealth Mgmt., 881 F. … demonstrates that disclosure would cause a clearly defined and serious injury,” i.e., substantial harm. 6 Estate of Gaither ex rel.

Robinson v. Davis Memorial Goodwill Industries

790 F. Supp. 325 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 21, 1992

Furthermore, in cases between private parties, the considerations implicated when a court construes a waiver of sovereign immunity, are not present. Those considerations guided the court in Van Meter v. … Absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, that language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive." Consumer Product Safety Com’n v.

Carothers v. Presser

636 F. Supp. 817 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 1986

More significantly, the present case is based on a set of facts that do not constitute “a departure from established norms.” … “[A] union cannot immunize itself against charges of discrimination simply by affording each member the ‘mere naked right to cast a ballot;’ the right each member has to vote must be ‘meaningful’.”

Grant Medical Center v. Hargan

875 F.3d 701 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 2017

In 2001, two Kentucky hospitals that fell short of the bed count needed to qualify for the DSH adjustment challenged CMS’ interpretation of section 412.105(b). See Clark Regional Medical Center v. … Cir. 1992), this ambiguity exists “only in the absence of statutory terms clearly directing the choice between retroactive and prospective application,” id. at 888 .

United States v. Evans

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 8, 2022

Under the Full Faith and Credit Act, federal courts must give preclusive effect to qualifying state court judgments. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738; Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 105 (1980). … Evans cites to justify the imposition of sanctions without a bad faith finding are non-binding on this Court and clearly distinguishable. Mr.

Wade v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 20, 2011

See Burlington, 548 U.S. at 68 (“An employee’s decision to report discriminatory behavior cannot immunize that employee from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience … Furthermore, “[c]ourts cannot examine whether any isolated action, on its own, qualifies as ‘adverse.’

Moeller v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 2021

Thus, the Commission has not established that its search was adequate. … This, without more, cannot establish that the attorney-client privilege was properly invoked.

Inyangette v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 7, 2026

State . . . or the District of Columbia [law]” deprives an individual of the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … Code § 1-102 (establishing the District as an entity that can “sue and be sued” as a “municipal corporation”).

National Association of Home Builders v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 18, 2010

In this letter, the EPA affirmed earlier determinations made by the Corps’ Los Angeles District that the two reaches qualified as TNWs.3 Compl. ¶ 4; EPA TNW Determination at 1. … The very reason that the CWA precludes pre-enforcement review of TNW determinations is that it clearly provides for judicial review of them in enforcement proceedings, see S.

Elam v. Rooftopdc LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 2020

Price alleged that he and another African-American employee, Christopher Wright, were fired and replaced by a less-qualified non-African American, Juan Cruz. Id., ¶¶ 20, 37–44, 73. Mr. … Elam alleged that he was similarly replaced by a non-African American who was less qualified. Id., ¶ 105.

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Internal Revenue Service

261 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 18, 2017

Feb. 21, 2017) Critically, the remedies that EPIC seeks here in response to the IRS’s closing of its FOIA requests qualify as relief under FOIA. … This is because the Service’s second argument clearly carries the day. The APA permits claims to “compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(1).

Chippewa Valley Hospital & Oakview Care Center, Inc. v. Leavitt

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2009

In applying Chevron, the Supreme Court has held that “[a]dministrative implementation of a particular statutory provision qualifies for Chevron deference when it appears that Congress delegated authority to the agency generally … The defendant counters that the rationale for his position is articulated clearly in the rule and that his position in this litigation “is precisely the position” that he took in promulgating the rule.

Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Miski

889 F. Supp. 2d 144 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 6, 2012

The United States established diplomatic relations with Libya in approximately 1952 or 1953. 13. … Here, the term “Libyan Embassy” clearly conveys consular services as the term “Vision Center” conveyed the delivery of optical services and, moreover, does not require the imaginativeness needed to associate sun tanning