Case law

Ralph Hoar & Associates v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

985 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 1997

At a status hearing on August 28,1995, the parties placed their qualified agreement to stay the litigation on the record. … Plaintiffs are clearly entitled to an award for opposing, and prevailing against, Defendant’s Motion to Strike. 3.

National Wildlife Federation v. Morton

393 F. Supp. 1286 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 2, 1975

It is then noted, however, that “a mere ‘interest in a problem,’ no matter how longstanding the interest and no matter how qualified the organization is in evaluating the problem, is not sufficient by itself to render the … This action clearly is neither a “taxpayer” nor a “citizen” suit.

Mdewakanton Sioux Indians of Minnesota v. Jewell

264 F. Supp. 3d 116 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 1, 2017

The Indians were permitted to use these lands under assignment established by the Department. . . . These Indians cannot be recognized as a tribe. … Circuit that “section 2401(a) creates ‘a jurisdictional condition attached to the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity.’” Hardin v. Jackson, 625 F.3d 739, 740 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (quoting P & V Enters. v. U.S.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. First City Financial Corp.

688 F. Supp. 705 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 15, 1988

Clearly, the affidavit is not admissible evidence of Belzberg’s intent. Rule 602 Fed.R.Evid. … The principle is well established.

National Community Reinvestment Coalition v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 2022

These records must “clearly and conspicuously disclose” the number and total dollar amount of mortgage loans by census tracts and/or by county, id. § 2803(a)(2)(A), as well as additional demographic and geographic information … Of these 401 institutions, 378 of them already qualify for the same partial, EGRRCPA exemptions. Id.

Glines v. Department of Defense

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 25, 2025

that Count VI should be dismissed insofar as it brings a claim under the Federal Torts Claims Act for reputational harm because Plaintiff did not name the United States as a defendant; and that even if she had, sovereign immunity … And Title VII clearly applies to Plaintiff’s equal protection claim because it prohibits employers from “discriminat[ing] against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment

Acree v. Republic of Iraq

271 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 7, 2003

Plaintiffs, former prisoners of war (“POWs”) during the Gulf War in 1991 and their close family members, filed this lawsuit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1602 , et seq. (2000). … Berryman was thrown into a prison cell from which he could clearly hear other American POWs being beaten by Iraqis.

SHELBY COUNTY ALA. v. Holder

811 F. Supp. 2d 424 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2011

Clearly, then, such evidence is — at the very least— relevant in assessing whether Section 5 remains “justified by current needs.” Nw. Austin II, 129 S.Ct. at 2512 . … Nevada contended that Congress had exceeded its Fourteenth Amendment enforcement authority by abrogating state sovereign immunity in the FMLA.

Slaughter v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 17, 2025

Finally, the balance of the equities and public interest heavily favor enforcing clearly established law that has been enacted by a coequal branch of government, reaffirmed by another coequal branch, and acquiesced to by … Cir. 2022), and because the court concludes that an injunction is clearly warranted, the court need not issue mandamus relief.

Chennareddy v. Walker

282 F.R.D. 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2012

The Court found that plaintiffs had met the “numerosity” requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), id. at 3-4, but that plaintiffs had not established commonality or typicality, id. at 4-9. … Chennareddy was equally or more qualified than all selectees for each position.” Id. (typographical errors in original).

In Re Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell

148 B.R. 660 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 1992

Glen Ayres, Jr., who was qualified as an expert witness, to establish that the best interest test had been met. … However, the cross-examination did not establish that the proceeds would be less than $425,000.00. At best, it established that the proceeds might be less.

Modern Muzzleloading, Inc. v. Magaw

18 F. Supp. 2d 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 7, 1998

Since it is a currently-manufactured weapon, the rifle cannot qualify directly under sub-paragraph (A). … Plaintiff contends that the record clearly demonstrates that a primer of the type used in the Knight Disc Rifle is an antique ignition system.

Roseberry-Andrews v. Pavlik-Keenan

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 13, 2018

But Roseberry-Andrews “points to no fact or statement to establish why . . . … But “[n]ot every document created by a government lawyer . . . qualifies for 22 the privilege (and thus, the exemption).” NACDL, 844 F.3d at 251. The D.C.

Oceana, Inc. v. Ross

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 11, 2019

For it clearly used to think that, at least in some respects, logbook data was superior to observer data. … Oceana’s hard-line, zero-means-zero approach to the ACL and AMs is thus difficult to square with guidelines that clearly build in some wiggle room.

Friendship Edison Public Charter School Chamberlain Campus v. Smith Ex Rel. L.S.

561 F. Supp. 2d 74 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 2008

Under District of Columbia law, a “qualified impartial Hearing Officer” conducts the due process hearing in accordance with the IDEA. D.C. Mun. Regs., tit. 5, § 3030.1(e) (2008). … By contrast, Defendants assert that “the law clearly supports that any discussions maintained or that occur in settlement discussions or negotiations [are] inadmissible.” Defs.’ Memorandum at 5.

Major v. Plumbers Local Union No. 5 of the United Ass'n of Journeymen

370 F. Supp. 2d 118 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2005

This clearly states a timely claim of an adverse employment action against Hughes, and therefore satisfies the requirements of Rule 12(b)(6). 8 The Union also argues that the allegations by Hood must be dismissed for failure … Major's second claim is disparate impact, and to establish this claim Major must show that an otherwise facially neutral practice resulted in .observed disparities between the racial composition of those qualified and those

Campbell v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa

130 F. Supp. 3d 236 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 16, 2015

that Catamaran effectively acted as an underwriter for her disability insurance policy as of July 2000, when it agreed with “at least one insurer” that Catamaran would “pay disability benefits to any person who does not qualify … Defendants argue that such “speculative, counterfactual” claims are insufficient to establish standing. Id. In response, Ms.

Beach Tv Properties Inc. v. Soloman

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2018

, to establish a deviation from that standard, and to establish that such a deviation was the proximate cause of the claimed damages.’” … Conk is not qualified to do so,” because “Mr.

Nio v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 16, 2018

Accordingly, USCIS has established that Mr. … Therefore, the balance clearly favors nondisclosure.

Saratoga Development Corp. v. United States

777 F. Supp. 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 1991

In CACI, the Court found that the plaintiff was within the zone of active consideration (having satisfied the “substantial chance” test) where it was one of six companies that qualified to submit a best and final offer, and … No such language exists in the statutes at issue here and judicially manageable standards clearly exist in the guise of the federal procurement laws.