Case law

Earthworks v. U.S. Department of the Interior

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 26, 2020

In other words, it is not permissible for the agency, not knowing if a claim is valid, to treat the claim as if it were valid under the Mining Law and therefore immune from the FLPMA’s fair market provision. … In fact, they clearly did anticipate the possibility of the BLM staying the course: the agency received “49 adverse comments” regarding the 1999 Proposed Rule’s mill site provisions. See 68 Fed.

Project on Government Oversight, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 2023

Exemption 6 extends to "personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Id. § 552(b)(6). B. … Consequently, this justification also does not meet the bar for establishing reasonably foreseeable harm under the FOIA Improvement Act.

Hall v. Central Intelligence Agency

881 F. Supp. 2d 38 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 3, 2012

The agency bears the burden of establishing that documents are properly classified as secret and thus clearly exempt from disclosure. Founding Church of Scientology of Wash., D.C., Inc. v. … However, information about federal employees generally does not qualify for protection. See Arieff v. Dep’t of the Navy, 712 F.2d 1462, 1467–68 (D.C.

Freeman v. Herring Networks, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 2022

Fourth, Giuliani says that because Freeman is “clearly a limited purpose public figure,” she was required to and failed to plead actual malice with respect to his statements regarding Freeman’s criminal history of voter … Circuit has provided guidance on how a protected opinion can bear a defamatory implication, explaining that “[j]ust as a speaker is not immunized from liability simply by prefacing otherwise defamatory statements with

Salak v. McCarthy

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2017

In short, because the record clearly establishes that the EPA’s decision to transfer Salak was made prior to Salak’s invocation of his rights under Title VII, no reasonable jury could find that the agency decided to reassign … (See generally id.) 8 The AJ found that, although the agency’s decision to initiate the process to reassign Salak to Seattle qualified as an adverse employment action and Salak had previously engaged in a protected activity

Lewis v. Executive Office for United State Attorneys

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 19, 2010

“[A] plaintiff pursuing an action under FOIA must establish that either: (1) the Vaughn index does not establish that the documents were properly withheld; (2) the agency has improperly claimed an exemption as a matter … However, any personal interest the plaintiff may have in the identities of the DEA Special Agents referenced in the letter from OPR does not qualify as a public interest favoring disclosure, and “it is well established

The CUNEO LAW GROUP, PC v. Joseph

669 F. Supp. 2d 99 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 19, 2009

I at 12, there is no requirement in the law that such clauses do so in order to qualify as a liquidated damages clause. … Moreover, the 2002 Settlement Agreement clearly bars the defendant from bringing these claims.

Jones v. District of Columbia

153 F. Supp. 3d 114 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 29, 2015

Further, although the District is correct that the Court in Smith did not clearly consider proposed Laffey rates, 13 this superficial distinction is of little consequence. … Established in Laffey v.

Ebbe v. Concorde Inv. Servs., LLC

392 F. Supp. 3d 228 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 18, 2019

Since Concorde knew Jill Cody was managing her husband's accounts during the suspension, the company investigated to ensure she was qualified to do so and conducted a surprise inspection of her office. … Westminster Ebbe argues that the panel acted in manifest disregard of the law in denying *238 relief against Westminster because the evidence clearly demonstrated that Richard Cody was acting within the scope of his employment

McCormick v. Berryhill

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 2021

The ALJ failed to clearly explain how Dr. Hill-Daniel’s opinion was contradicted by substantial evidence and why she gave greater weight to the opinion of the non-treating physician, Dr. … A claimant’s allegations alone do not establish disability. See 20 C.F.R. Section 404.1529.

Isse v. American University

540 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 25, 2008

Defendant does not challenge Plaintiffs ability to establish his prima facie case, and the Court agrees that Plaintiff easily establishes each prong, with respect to both religious and national origin discrimination. … Circuit has pointed out, however, the same actor inference is just that, an inference, which “cannot immunize [defendant] from liability for subsequent discrimination, [and is not] alone sufficient to keep [a] case from the

Marcus v. Department of Treasury

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 31, 2022

Code § 2-1401.01 et seq., against the federal government on the ground that sovereign immunity bars it, see Marcus v. Geithner, 813 F. … Worth as part of the newly established public tour.

Perry v. Belt

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 2011

Therefore, Perry has failed to establish that he has any recoverable damages resulting from the alleged breach. … Therefore, Perry cannot establish a breach of the Settlement Agreement even assuming he could establish that the PBGC tolerated a hostile work environment, which, as shown above, he cannot.

Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance

746 F. Supp. 1145 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 19, 1990

As detailed above, Landmark contends that invasions of the right of private occupancy are similar to, but due to some technical defect, not quite qualifying as, wrongful entry or eviction. … Specifically, one establishes a legal interest in res nullius, or unclaimed property, by establishing (a) dominion or control over it with (h) an intent to keep that object as one’s own. See, e.g., Pierson v.

Unitedhealthcare Insurance Company v. Burwell

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 7, 2018

The Affordable Care Act established a basic statutory framework but left several crucial terms undefined. … “Congress clearly had no intention to turn the FCA, a law designed to punish and deter fraud, into a vehicle for either ‘punish[ing] honest mistakes or incorrect claims submitted through mere negligence’ or imposing ‘a

Prunte' v. Universal Music Group, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2010

Prunté’s works were, in his view, infringed by [the defendants’] works” and “clearly identify[ing] the allegedly infringed portions of Mr. … Even if actual copying is established, a plaintiff must establish actionable copying to prevail. In other words, “[c]opying as a factual matter is insufficient, if [actionable copying] is lacking.”

Augustus v. Harvey

825 F. Supp. 2d 245 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 22, 2011

The defendant invokes FOIA exemptions 6 and 7(C) (id. at 6),14 which exempt the government from having to disclose (1) “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly … Nor does she demonstrate that any actual repository for the ROI qualifies as a system of records.

Level the Playing Field v. Federal Election Commission

232 F. Supp. 3d 130 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 2017

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the invalidity of the agency’s action. Id. III. DISCUSSION A. … LPF clearly argued, and attempts to establish with significant evidence, that in presidential elections CPD’s polling threshold is being used subjectively to exclude independent and third-party candidates, which has the

State of New York v. Donald J. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 6, 2022

Third, Defendants argue that, “even if Plaintiffs could establish causation or redressability, they cannot establish that the alleged USPS policy changes will cause material mail delays that will inflict any injury upon … Cir. 2009) (holding that a statutory provision requiring an agency to hire “suitably qualified” U.S. citizens was not subject to ultra vires review).

Escamilla v. Nuyen

227 F. Supp. 3d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 3, 2017

Further, the findings of fact, “whether based on oral or other evidence, must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and the reviewing court must give due regard to the trial court’s opportunity to judge the witnesses … Further, the Court determined that it “need not, and likely should not, establish a per se rule regarding the effect of a failure to post FLSA notices.” Id. at 291.