Case law

United States v. Wright

285 F. Supp. 3d 443 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 22, 2018

Wright first argued that the "independent, non-hearsay" evidence was insufficient to establish the existence of a conspiracy between Wright and the various declarants. Def.'s Mot. 3. … Lara , 181 F.3d 183 , 196 (1st Cir. 1999), it need not address any potential uncharged conspiracy because *455 the statements here were clearly related to and in furtherance of the conspiracies charged.

Center for Food Safety v. S.M.R. Jewell

83 F. Supp. 3d 126 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 16, 2015

“[E]ach refuge shall be managed to fulfill the mission of the System, as well as the specific purposes for which that refuge was established.” Id. § 668dd(a)(3)(A). … The title “Comprehensive Management Plan” reflected the pre- 1997 statutory scheme, but the Agency determined at that time that the plan qualified as a Comprehensive Conservation Plan for the purposes of the Refuge Act.

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society v. Internal Revenue Service

208 F. Supp. 3d 58 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 20, 2016

Because the records withheld relate to an audit of plaintiff to determine whether it qualifies for tax-exempt status, the records were compiled for a law enforcement purpose. … has now come forward with sufficient information for the Court to conclude that the records were compiled to determine whether the informants’ complaints merited a review of Sea Shepherd’s tax exempt status, which is clearly

Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Bender

595 F. Supp. 1209 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 1984

Fraud “must be established by clear and convincing evidence, which is not equally consistent with either honesty or deceit.” Bennett v. … Clearly, defendants were not damaged as a result.

Craig v. Lew

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 21, 2018

placing the plaintiff in the position he was initially refused “seem[ed] clearly inequitable.” … Craig must establish that he is the prevailing party, and if he succeeds in establishing this element he must further establish (1) a reasonable hourly rate for his attorneys’ services; (2) the number of hours reasonably

Neville v. Burrows

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 13, 2024

Pate did not resolve the issue because the plaintiff clearly lacked Article III standing in any event. … The Court has no mandamus jurisdiction because Plaintiffs have not established any clear duty for the EEOC to act by referring the case to the Attorney General or the Office of Special Counsel.

Cobell v. Norton

394 F. Supp. 2d 164 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 20, 2005

The evidence clearly shows that IITD is, at present, not adequately secure. … Moreover, the facts established at this evidentiary hearing are clearly contrary to the reports Interior was providing to the Court, including the many improper certifications and accreditation of IT systems in 2004.

Amiri v. National Science Foundation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 2021

The agency can establish the adequacy of its search via affidavits or declarations that “explain in reasonable detail the scope and method of the search.” See Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108, 1122 (D.C. … Cir. 2015) (“Although a FOIA response could [qualify as an official disclosure], a simple clerical mistake in FOIA processing cannot.”).

WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar

741 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 2010

Equally telling, FWS’ briefing does not cite to this case’s administrative record to establish how FWS interpreted the phrase when it was considering the Reclassification Petition. … See Defenders (Lizard), 258 F.3d at 1143 ("[I]t simply does not make sense to assume that the loss of a predetermined percentage of habitat or range would necessarily qualify a species for listing.

Wilcox v. Georgetown University

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2023

Upon departure from employment, a participant could leave the funds invested in the TIAA Traditional Annuity and receive a monthly pension payment whenever that person qualified for it, or withdraw … Futility Like the original complaint, the proposed amended complaint could have been more clearly organized.

Rush v. Federal National Mortgage Association

208 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 2016

Code § 2-1403.16(a) “clearly means that a defendant is not entitled to any sort of pre-lawsuit notification as to the particulars of a plaintiff’s claims . . . .” Rush’s Mem. Opp. at 4. Ms. … Britt’s feeling that she was “not qualified and trained to work on the new projects, such as the Offsite Storage dashboard and procedures.” Pl.’s Ex. 11 at ECF No. 14-15. Ms.

Hatim v. Obama

953 F. Supp. 2d 40 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2013

The judges of England developed the writ of habeas corpus largely to preserve these immunities from executive restraint. Rasul, 542 U.S. at 474 , 124 S.Ct. 2686 (citing Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. … The Supreme Court described this reasoning clearly in Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 , 99 S.Ct. 1861 , 60 L.Ed.2d 447 (1979).

McBryde v. Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct & Disability Orders of the Judicial Conference of the United States

83 F. Supp. 2d 135 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 30, 1999

On its face, however, the Act clearly precludes review of a judge’s judicial decisions. … Nonetheless, even “core” protected speech is not immune from government regulation.

Walsh v. Ford Motor Co.

106 F.R.D. 378 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 9, 1985

.- Adequacy of Representation The two criteria for determining the adequacy of representation are that plaintiffs’ counsel be “qualified, experienced, and generally capable to conduct the proposed litigation and ... … Here, these questions naturally involve issues such as the availability of class-wide proof in establishing a cause of action for breach of implied warranty, establishing the level of damages, handling the process of individualized

Stone v. United States Department of State ca/ocs/ci

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 2022

“A court may properly issue a writ of mandamus only if ‘the duty to be performed is ministerial and the obligation to act peremptory and clearly defined. … Cir. 1987)). 12 Though Plaintiff refers to S.S. not qualifying for Cares Act benefits absent a Social Security number, Compl. ¶ 128, as well as a “mountain of damages” arising from the passport claims, id. ¶ 33, Plaintiff

Petworth Holdings, LLC v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2021

It has also barred operators of such stations from “substantially reduc[ing] the number, types, quantity, or quality of the repair, maintenance, and other services . . . offered” and required them to provide “a qualified … In any event, it is hard to argue that it clearly supports the city. As to Petworth’s “reasonable investment-backed expectations.”

In Re: Guantanamo Bay Detainee Continued Access to Counsel

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2013

The judges of England developed the writ of habeas corpus largely to preserve these immunities from executive restraint. Rasul, 542 U.S. at 474 (citing Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. … The Supreme Court described this reasoning clearly in Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979).

Conserve Southwest Utah v. U.S. Department of the Interior

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 1, 2026

Third, the BiOp relies on the establishment of Zone 6 to offset the harm to the critical habitat elsewhere in Red Cliffs NCA. … But Plaintiffs have, nevertheless, established a qualifying irreparable injury resulting from the “[g]round disturbance associated with initial fencing and related activities” that will occur in the absence of an order

University of Colorado Health at Memorial Hospital v. Burwell

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 17, 2022

“Commenters clearly understood that” how best to project CCRs to account for the trend of decline was “under consideration, as the agency received comments [on the method] from several sources.” … A waste qualified for the category if it was both “high volume” and “low hazard.” See id. at 480.

Long v. Howard University

512 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 25, 2007

Plaintiff omits reference to the paragraph immediately preceding the instruction on reconsideration which clearly states that the jury is assigned the “question of fact” of determining “whether, and if so, when” plaintiff … Plaintiff objected to the admissibility of his undisputed statement of material facts in support of his motion summary judgment, on the ground that there was nothing establishing that plaintiff “saw, read, [or] endorsed”