Case law

United States v. Hillie

227 F. Supp. 3d 57 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 5, 2017

The indictment at issue here clearly fails to satisfy these basic constitutionally mandated principles. … insufficient a “blanket” indictment charging theft of “property” in general terms, without any description of the property, where the statute “at least mention[ed] ‘goods, wares, merchandise, securities or money’” as qualifying

Martin-Trigona v. Univ. of District of Columbia

668 F. Supp. 682 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 1987

II The allocation of burdens in Title VII cases of discrimination has been clearly set forth by the Supreme Court. … Such a prima facie case is established when the plaintiff proves that (a) she belonged to a class of persons protected by Title VII, (b) she was qualified for the promotion/salary increase for which she was not selected (

Cascina Ca De Lupis, S.R.L. v. Bonino

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2010

Sparks, 449 U.S. 24, 27 (1980) (explaining that although “the judicial immunity doctrine required dismissal of the § 1983 action against the judge who issued the challenged injunction . . . [, i]t does not follow . . . … Accordingly, the plaintiff has satisfied the first element required to establish a civil conspiracy. 2.

Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2023

While a theory of indirect causation makes it harder to establish standing, Plaintiffs’ load is lightened in other respects. … But even assuming that the environmental status quo is what matters, this still qualifies.

Garza v. United States Marshal Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 2018

interest in non-disclosure against any qualifying public interest in disclosure. … DEA has established that this information is protected under Exemption 7. See Adionser, 33 F.

Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. McKay

115 F. Supp. 402 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 17, 1953

Under the terms of this section the Administrator is empowered to authorize loans for four separate and distinct purposes to rural residents who qualify under the Act. … The burden of proof, of course, rests on plaintiffs to establish that SPA, in the circumstances, becomes the owner under the contract.

United States v. Jones

72 F. Supp. 3d 92 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 30, 2014

Appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise clearly non-meritorious issues. C.f. United States v. Sayan, 968 F.2d 55, 65 (D.C. … custody was properly maintained; the laboratory analysis in question accurately reflected the results of the chemical analysis; and that Lanette Allison, the Forensic Chemist who completed the laboratory analysis, was qualified

Webster v. Scott & Reid General Contractors, Inc. (In Re Nettel Corp.)

458 B.R. 782 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2011

The fax, as Scott & Reid suggests, does provide a stiek-and-earrot scheme; however, the stick is clearly the threat of placing a lien against the landlord’s building, and the carrot is refraining from doing so if payment … This, however, does not establish that NETtel intended the payment to Scott & Reid to release a constitutional lien, already in existence, of which Ellis had no knowledge.

In Re: Latricia L. Hardy

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 11, 2018

As previously discussed, this Court concludes that the turnover order was properly entered and the record clearly establishes that Ms. Hardy did not comply with the Bankruptcy Court’s order. Indeed, Ms. … The Bankruptcy Court concluded that it was immaterial whether ACC was registered to “do business” in the District of Columbia because entering into a loan or mortgage does not qualify as “doing business in the District

Johnson v. Social Security Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 25, 2022

At step one of the disability-evaluation process, the ALJ decided that Johnson clearly met the requirement of not being engaged in gainful employment. A.R. 13, 109. … To “establish the existence of a medically determinable impairment . . . there must be evidence from an ‘acceptable medical source’ for this purpose.”

Merrill v. Federal Open Market Committee

516 F. Supp. 1028 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 9, 1981

In conjunction with reserve requirements established by the Federal Reserve Board, 12 U.S.C. § 461 , FOMC activities affect the availability of funds in the economy. … The Supreme Court, however, reached a different conclusion holding that a privilege from disclosure, analogous to the qualified privilege for confidential commercial information available in civil discovery under Rule 26(

National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2025

Cir. 2003) (“[UAW] clearly has standing, and we need not consider whether the other plaintiffs do.”), citing Mountain States Legal Found. v. Glickman, 92 F.3d 1228, 1232 (D.C. Cir. 1996). … On January 23, 2025, Steege met with CFPB employees and the Student Loan Ombudsman, who explained that she qualified for not only loan forgiveness under the program, but also a $15,000 refund of overpayments. Id. ¶ 4.

Mwani v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 20, 2022

He considered two cases from this Circuit: one, a case of torture and extra-judicial killings brought under the state-sponsor-of-terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) in which the court assessed … Doing so was clearly erroneous and worked a manifest injustice. 18 5.

Furey v. Mnuchin

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2018

framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … Plaintiff also points to Susarla’s deposition testimony, in which he clearly could not remember how or why Graham provided any supplemental information to him.

California Department of Health Services v. Babbitt

46 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1999

If this were the case, then the ROD clearly violated the TRO. … concern, and the Judge agreed, that an important consideration was that if the transfer occurred, plaintiffs would be left with no recourse as they would not be able to sue California due to its Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity

Coubaly v. Cargill, Incorporated

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2022

Id. at 2204–05 (explaining the kinds of tangible and intangible harms that qualify as “concrete” in terms of “harms that exist in the real world” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).3 “Article 3 In contrast … Unlike here, the relationship between the defendants and the group that harmed the plaintiffs was clearly defined, and there was no need for the court to speculate about the link between the two.

James v. International Painters & Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan

710 F. Supp. 2d 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 2010

The language quoted above clearly grants discretionary authority under the teachings of both Firestone and Block . … Put differently, if the plaintiff does not qualify as a “participant” or a “beneficiary,” then the plaintiff lacks the statutory standing to sue for damages.

Defending Animal Rights Today and Tomorrow v. Washington Sports and Entertainment, Lp

821 F. Supp. 2d 97 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 20, 2011

“A plaintiff’s standing under Article III of the United States Constitution must be determined first in order to establish the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the case . . . … Grace, 461 U.S. 171, 180 (1981) (holding that private sidewalk on the outer boundaries of government property was indistinguishable from public sidewalks and therefore qualified as a public forum).

Grundmann v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2025

But by all indications, none of the FRLA’s powers identified by the Government qualifies as a substantial executive power. … The case before the Court involves legal relations that clearly need to be clarified. Ms.

United States v. Hill

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 14, 2021

Circuit explained that “police establish probable cause for a search where they corroborate a reliable informant’s tip about drug activity at a residence by conducting a single controlled buy of illegal narcotics,” 42 F … Moreover, Hill’s statement, unlike Munson’s, omitted the qualifier “I think.” Although most cases have found the phrase “I’d rather” to be unequivocal, not every court has agreed. Notably, in United States v.