Case law

Fruge v. Powell

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 5, 2022

My inclination is to express those sentiments directly and clearly to Laurie, and then to begin a process of managing her out. … Even If Fruge Could Establish a Prima Facie Case, the Board Has Established that It Would Have Terminated Fruge Anyway.

Waters v. Armenian Genocide Museum & Memorial, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 26, 2011

Krasne, the Court ruled that he was qualified to testify as an expert on issues of corporate governance. See 11/19 PM Tr. at 4. … Therefore, even assuming arguendo that the Assembly’s mailing lists qualify as trade secrets under D.C. law, Plaintiffs have not established that Defendants are liable for misappropriation.

United States v. Proctor

931 F. Supp. 897 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 2, 1996

After speaking with a representative of the Departure Committee, the AUSA informed the defendant that he could still theoretically qualify for a 5K1.1 letter without testifying as long as the information provided significant … A predicate to arguing that the government acted in bad faith in complying with the terms of the agreement must be establishing that the government had an obligation in the first place.

Cockrum v. Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 3, 2018

As the Supreme Court has explained, “restrictions on personal jurisdiction are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation.” Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 137 S. … But before the Court can address the two bases for specific jurisdiction, it is necessary to clearly delineate what is not at issue here.

Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network, Inc. v. Gaubatz

793 F. Supp. 2d 311 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 2011

That principle is both well-established and uncontroversial. However, it only applies where the publisher has “lawfully acquired” the information. Cohen v. … First, the Gaubatz Defendants argue that electronic data does not qualify as the sort of “personal property” protected by the tort of conversion. See id.

Miller Ex Rel. Miller v. Laird

349 F. Supp. 1034 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 31, 1972

Three years ago, paternity was established judicially and the father was directed to make weekly payments toward the support of the child. 19 When suit was filed, the child resided with her mother and maternal grandmother … . 20 The father was then serving in the Army in Vietnam and was not contributing to the child’s support. 21 The complaint alleges the understandable desire of the mother and grandmother to qualify the child for medical care

National Parks Conservation Association v. United States Forest Service

177 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2016

. § 4321 et seq., “establishes a ‘national policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment.’” U.S. Dep’t of Transp. v. Pub. … The court wrote: The dispute . . . goes beyond a disagreement of qualified experts over the “reasoned conclusions” as to what the data reveal.

Rhodes v. United States

967 F. Supp. 2d 246 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 9, 2013

Congress created a limited waiver of sovereign immunity of the United States by enacting the FTCA, the provisions of which must be strictly construed in favor of the United States. See Dep’t of Army v. … Bureau of Prisons, 552 U.S. 214, 217-18 (2008) (“In the FTCA, Congress waived the United States’ sovereign immunity for claims arising out of torts committed by federal employees.”).

Scutellaro v. Capitol Supply, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 19, 2017

Cir. 2014), in which another Judge on this Court held that a similar “site qualifies as ‘news media.’” See Def.’s Mem. Supp. MSJ at 19. … The defendant contends that the relator does not qualify as an original source. See Def.’s Reply Supp. MSJ at 18–23.

Doe 1 v. American Federation of Government Employees

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 13, 2022

Plaintiffs have not cited any authority for the proposition that an individual can rely on a joint-employer theory to articulate a claim under § 1981. 12 Defendants also assert that Cox and AFGE did not qualify as plaintiffs … AFGE’s request is thus clearly moot, and plaintiffs’ motion is likely moot as well. Even if plaintiffs’ motion is still valid, however, it is meritless.

Dick v. Holder

80 F. Supp. 3d 103 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 19, 2015

[an] employee who is an otherwise qualified individual with a disability” and “using . . . employment tests . . . that screen out or tend to screen out an individual with a disability,” unless the tests are “shown to be … Although Agent Dick could have taken certain actions in administrative proceedings to preserve more clearly his dismissed claim, 19 nowhere do the regulations require Agent Dick to do so in order to exhaust the claim.

National Association of Mortgage Brokers v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2011

Economic harm may qualify as irreparable, however, “where a plaintiff’s alleged damages are unrecoverable.” Sterling Commercial Credit - Michigan, LLC v. Phoenix Indus. … Both grounds NAIHP relies upon to demonstrate irreparable injury are insufficient to establish a need for extraordinary injunctive relief.

Public Citizen, Inc. v. Trump

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 2018

Deregulatory actions need not qualify as “significant” and thus take a “wide[r] range” of forms than regulatory actions. Id. Second, unlike prior executive orders, cf. Exec. … But, again, establishing standing based on an increased risk of harm requires more.

California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools v. Devos

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 31, 2020

To qualify as a “participating institution” under this program—known as the William D. … arbitration agreements in the context of federal contracts, grants, and programs. 25 harmonized, and that one displaces the other, bears a heavy burden of showing ‘a clearly

Ross v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 28, 2017

P laintiffs Have Not Established That Lockheed’s P erformance Review System Causes Racially Disparate Outcomes In A Manner That Can Be Established Through Common P roof As explained … P laintiffs’ expected class clearly encompasses individuals with widely varying experiences of discrimination.

Young v. General Services Administration

99 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 1, 2000

The government also argues that plaintiffs seek to compel the government to consider an alternative proposal that clearly fails to meet the SFO’s minimum requirements. … The Tongass Land Management Plan established general goals for the land in the Tongass National Forest. 15 .

Suarez v. Compass Coffee LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 3, 2025

It extends even to “respected and legitimate enterprises,” which “enjoy neither an inherent incapacity for criminal activity nor immunity from its consequences.” Sedima, 473 U.S. at 499. … Suarez has very clearly alleged that he suffered injuries to his property that were proximately caused by the Defendants’ misrepresentations about his ownership interest in Compass.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Bank of America, N.A.

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 14, 2025

The spreadsheets themselves include several counterparties that clearly have not been consolidated at the ultimate parent level. See id. … See ECF No. 372-2, at 59; ECF No. 376-2, at 29 n.11. 57 government” because “the ‘sovereign’ nature of an agency’s action does not immunize the agency from the reach of

Richard v. Bell Atlantic Corporation

946 F. Supp. 54 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 25, 1996

This is clearly not the case. … See First Chicago Intern., 836 F.2d at 1379 (bare allegations of “conspiracy or agency is insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction”); Sunlite, Inc. v.

Thomas v. Securiguard Incorporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2019

by a private contractor, unless Congress clearly authorizes such regulation.” 486 U.S. 174, 181 (1988). … While defendant’s arguments have some force, the record does not clearly establish that plaintiff did not report the harassment until February 2016.