Case law

Lee v. Barr

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 23, 2020

Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted), and it “ensure[s] that the federal courts are burdened only when reasonably necessary,” Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 14 (D.C. Cir. 1985). … See Brown v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 829 (1976).

Iglesias v. Central Intelligence Agency

525 F. Supp. 547 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 21, 1981

Board of Trade of the City of Chicago v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 627 F.2d 392 (D.C.Cir.1980). … Robbins Tire & Rubber Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 563 F.2d 724, 734-736 (5th Cir. 1977).

Al-Qahtani v. Bush

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 6, 2020

A Periodic Review Board reviews each detainee’s status and determines whether to recommend release. … Judge Lamberth found that the motion did not sound in habeas because the Periodic Review Board’s determination made release discretionary and, therefore, the district court lacked jurisdiction. Salahi v.

Clarke v. United States

705 F. Supp. 605 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 13, 1988

See, e.g., Riley v. National Federation of the Blind, — U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 2667 , 101 L.Ed.2d 669 (1988) (first amendment necessarily comprises the decision of what to say and what not to say); Board of Education v. … Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 568 , 88 S.Ct. 1731, 1734 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968)).

Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Callaway

431 F. Supp. 722 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 2, 1977

This report substantially adopted the recommendations of the Board of Engineers and was accompanied by a draft EIS. … In Jones v.

Allen v. Morton

333 F. Supp. 1088 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 3, 1971

2 In Allen v. … In Lemon v.

Blanchard v. Marzall

111 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 15, 1952

rejected in Blanchard v. … (Board, pp. .5, 6) The Court is also aware of the validity of the rule of law so succinctly laid down by Judge Fahy in Standard Oil Development Co. v.

Tavoulareas v. Washington Post Co.

111 F.R.D. 653 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 11, 1986

See Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. FTC, 710 F.2d 1165, 1179 (6th Cir.1983); Joy v. North, 692 F.2d 880, 894 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1051 , 103 S.Ct. 1498 , 75 L.Ed.2d 930 (1983). … Zenith Radio Corp. v.

Marshall v. United States Postal Service

481 F. Supp. 179 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 1979

Although there is precedent concerning another section of this Act, Usery v. Board of Public Education, 418 F.Supp. 1037 (W.D.Pa.1976) (Section 17); Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. … See Usery v. Board of Public Education, supra, 418 F.Supp. at 1039 (Secretary’s suit filed under Section 17). Intervenors rely principally on Trbovich v.

Kinard v. Office of Bar Counsel

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 22, 2010

See Nwachukwu v. Rooney, 362 F. Supp. 2d 183, 192 (D.D.C. 2005) (establishing Bar Counsel as a component of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals' Board of Professional Responsibility). … To the extent that plaintiff has "a common-law right of access to public records that stands independently of the Freedom of Information Act," Hill v. Fed. Judicial Center, 238 Fed. Appx. 622,623 (D.C.

McNair v. Smoot

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 7, 2019

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … (quoting Hardy v. United States, 578 A.2d 178, 181 (D.C. 1990)); Brown v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 713 F.

United States v. American Film Institute

79 F.R.D. 374 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 1978

See Elliot v. … Federal Home Loan Bank Board, 233 F.Supp. 578 (S.D.Cal.1964) (Bank Board a proper defendant in inter-pleader even though it had no property interest in the res but only an interest in seeing to the proper distribution of

Farah v. Government of the Republic of Somaliland

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2024

See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Am. Nat’l Ins. Co. v. FDIC, 642 F.3d 1137, 1139 (D.C. Cir. 2011); Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp. Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 150, 152 (D.C. Cir. 2015). … Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011) (cleaned up).

Sheldon v. National RR Passenger Corp.

355 F. Supp. 2d 174 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 4, 2005

Similarly, in Schmidt v. Am. … V.

Dalley v. Mitchell Rubenstein & Associates, P.C.

172 F. Supp. 3d 6 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 2016

Supp. 2d at 26; see also Parker v. … DATE: March 18, 2016 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

American Civil Liberties Union v. Mineta

319 F. Supp. 2d 69 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 2, 2004

See Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. at 640-42 , 119 S.Ct. 1661 (recipients of federal funding must comply with Title IX); South Dakota v. … Mot. at 10-11; see also Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v.

Lee v. Barr

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 23, 2020

Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted), and it “ensure[s] that the federal courts are burdened only when reasonably necessary,” Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 14 (D.C. Cir. 1985). … See Brown v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 829 (1976).

O'Malley v. Jackson

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 31, 2015

See Taylor v. United States Board of Parole, 194 F.2d 882, 883 (DC. … . § 2255); Ojo v.

Gosen v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Services

75 F. Supp. 3d 279 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 4, 2014

See Brown v. FBI, 873 F. Supp. 2d 388, 404 (D.D.C. 2012) (“Names and/or identifying information are often granted categorical exemption under 7(C).”); Keys v. DHS, 510 F. … DATE: December 4, 2014 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

Dorsey v. District of Columbia Department of Health

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 2026

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. … Brown v. Sessoms, 774 F.3d 1016, 1022 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (quoting George v. Leavitt, 407 F.3d 405, 412 (D.C. Cir. 2005)).