Case law

Ansary v. Central Bank of Curacao and Sint Maarten

District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2024

Plaintiff concedes that Defendant qualifies as a “foreign state” entitled to foreign sovereign immunity. Am. … Plaintiff argues—for the first time, in her opposition—that “Central Bank’s actions qualify under all three waiver examples.” Opp’n at 26.

Sanders v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2009

Defendants’ argument as to futility on the qualified immunity question is doubtful in light of the Court’s earlier denial of defendants’ motion to dismiss on the grounds of qualified immunity. See Sanders v. … immunity.

Winkey v. Campanale

District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2013

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The plaintiff’s claim fails under the first prong of the qualified immunity test—violation of a constitutional right.

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 13, 2010

For a document to qualify for this exemption, "it must fall within the ambit of a privilege against discovery under judicial standards that would govern litigation against the agency that holds it." … It is well-established that information identifYing law enforcement and support personnel can be withheld pursuant to Exemption 7(C). See Amuso v. Us. Dep 't ofJustice, 600 F.

Johnson v. Sullivan

748 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 29, 2010

Prosecutorial Immunity To the extent the plaintiff brings this action against McCool in his individual capacity, McCool argues that he is entitled to absolute or qualified immunity from the plaintiffs demands for monetary … immunity arguments.

Monument Realty LLC v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

535 F. Supp. 2d 60 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2008

The second bid contained an escalating bid clause, in which MRB 7 agreed to pay $250,000 more than any other qualified bidder. Id. ¶ 72. … Under certain conditions, liability for discretionary actions is shielded by sovereign immunity, whereas sovereign immunity never shields ministerial actions.

Winston v. Monahan

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2026

But only one of their cited cases is binding on this court, and the issue there was whether Secret Service officers had qualified immunity, not whether a Bivens remedy was available. See Reichle v. … ECF No. 25-1, at 7-10; see Woodruff, 2017 WL 4286190, at *3 (“When the United States asserts the discretionary function exception, an agency’s internal guidelines may qualify as ‘facts necessary to establish jurisdiction

Bakhtiar v. Islamic Republic of Iran

571 F. Supp. 2d 27 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 17, 2008

As a general rule, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), enacted in 1976, establishes that foreign states are immune from suit in courts in the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1604 . 7 There are a limited number of exceptions … Furthermore, “assassination is clearly contrary to the precepts of humanity as recognized in both national and international law.” Id.

Osseiran v. International Finance Corp.

498 F. Supp. 2d 139 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 2007

Because he has established subject matter jurisdiction, his request will be denied as moot. … CONCLUSION AND ORDER Osseiran has demonstrated that IFC waived its immunity for this action under IOIA and its Articles of Agreement, thus establishing subject matter jurisdiction.

Ollar v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 10, 2022

Because Plaintiffs’ suit is clearly barred under the doctrines of issue preclusion, absolute immunity, and statutory immunity, the Court need not address those alternative arguments. 11 District Defendants bring … Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 11 (2015) (“The doctrine of qualified immunity[, for example,] shields officials from civil liability [only] so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Beran v. United States

759 F. Supp. 886 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 1991

In order to make a cognizable Bivens claim, the plaintiff must meet a “heightened pleading standard” and “specify the ‘clearly established’ rights [he] allege[s] to have been violated with ... precision].” Martin v. … Defendants argue that even if plaintiff does raise a legitimate fourth amendment claim, they are entitled to qualified immunity. Citing Anderson v.

El-Hadad v. Embassy of the United Arab Emirates

69 F. Supp. 2d 69 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 1999

The Court of Appeals commented that “[t]his report clearly marks employment of civil servants as noncommercial for purposes of restrictive immunity. … Establishing personal jurisdiction over a foreign state requires a two-step analysis.

Krodel v. Young

576 F. Supp. 390 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 1983

Clearly, the Court would not have done so if the language of the act prohibited such a finding. 7 . … It is well established that in such a case, a party qualifies as a "prevailing party” if he succeeds “on any significant issue in litigation which achieves some of the benefit the parties sought in bringing suit."

United States v. Wade

93 F. Supp. 2d 19 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 2000

Claim for Attorney’s Fees and Expenses Under the Equal Access to Justice Act Under sovereign immunity, the Government is free from attorney’s fees liability “except to the extent it has waived its immunity.” … The plain language of the statute clearly limits this waiver of sovereign immunity to “civil cases other than cases sounding in tort”. Id.

Sibley v. MacAluso

955 F. Supp. 2d 57 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 26, 2013

“Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction . . . .” Pierson v. … Moreover, the qualified right to inspect certain court proceedings derives from a broader “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents,” which would not include a judge’s personal trial calendar.

Cromartie v. District of Columbia

729 F. Supp. 2d 281 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 6, 2010

Defendants’ motion clearly shows the weaknesses in Plaintiffs claims, and Plaintiffs silence in opposition is telling. … Plaintiffs admissions that he disobeyed Officer Rodriguezgil’s instructions to be quiet and argued at length with the officer clearly *286 establish the existence of probable cause for Plaintiffs arrest, which requires only

Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran

879 F. Supp. 2d 44 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 25, 2012

These claims clearly involve “personal injury or death” under FSIA § 1605A(a)(l). … Here, the established facts warrant waiver of defendants’ sovereign immunity as provided by the FSIA.

Kurd v. Republic of Turkey

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2025

Based on these principles, Borazan establishes a false imprisonment claim here. … Supp. 3d at 55 (dismissing without prejudice Plaintiff Kheirabadi’s IIED claim based on mere conclusory assertion of “severe emotional distress”).14 Here, Plaintiffs have all adduced evidence demonstrating a qualifying

Fraternal Order of Police, DC v. Rubin

26 F. Supp. 2d 133 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 30, 1998

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Accordingly, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, and all claims against the defendants in their individual capacities must be dismissed. 8 IV.

Williams v. Johnson

597 F. Supp. 2d 107 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 18, 2009

A legislature’s efforts to acquire information during formal committee investigations or through the issuance of subpoenas thus clearly constitute “legislative acts” covered by the Speech or Debate Clause. 421 U.S. at 504 … First, Plaintiff argues that the Court should find that the District’s Speech or Debate statute provides only qualified, not absolute, immunity, and that the Court should therefore balance Plaintiffs need for the evidence