Case law

McFadden v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

949 F. Supp. 2d 214 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 2013

” functions, or immune “governmental” functions. … Because “the 10 burden of establishing immunity [is] on the official,” id. at 1289, and because the individual defendants have utterly failed to carry that burden, the

Valentini v. Stratton

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 14, 2025

In November 2021, she filed for deferred retirement, qualifying her “for an immediate annuity the first day of the month after” she reached the minimum retirement age, i.e., December 1, 2021. Id. … It is well established 2 The United States has certified Stratton acted within the scope of her employment during the relevant period. ECF No. 11-1; see Harbury v. Hayden, 522 F.3d 413, 416 (D.C.

Roeder v. Islamic Republic of Iran

195 F. Supp. 2d 140 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 18, 2002

As a result, plaintiffs failed to establish one of the necessary elements of the exception to sovereign immunity created by the 1996 Anti-terrorism Act. … Banco Para El Comercio Exterior de Cuba, 462 U.S. 611, 620 , 103 S.Ct. 2591 , 77 L.Ed.2d 46 (1983) (“The language and history of the FSIA clearly establish that the Act was not intended to affect the substantive law determining

Zweibon v. Mitchell

444 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 9, 1978

deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed. … First, we believe that the Zweibon decision established a new principle of law.

Goodman v. Svahn

614 F. Supp. 726 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 1, 1985

The defendants in Aeree raised the defense of absolute immunity. … Matteo, 360 U.S. 564 , 79 S.Ct. 1335 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1434 (1959), or the general rule of qualified immunity of federal officials for actions arising under the Constitution, Butz v.

Estate of John Doe v. Islamic Republic of Iran

808 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 16, 2011

LEXIS 99191, at *26 (finding that the attack “clearly qualifies as an extrajudicial killing”). Iran and MOIS, through Hizballah, killed and attempted to kill individuals on site in both the 1983 U.S. … Hence, the 1983 and 1984 Embassy bombings both qualify as an "extrajudicial killing." iii.

Santos v. McDonough

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 10, 2025

Santos had standing to seek the injunction, but she did not clearly show she was suffering or would suffer irreparable harm before the Court could rule on the merits of her claims. See Mem. … Lane, 518 U.S. at 193 (“[I]t cannot be disputed that a reference to ‘Federal provider[s]’ of financial assistance . . . does not, without more, establish” a waiver of “the Federal Government’s immunity against monetary

Lee v. Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2025

The court finds that a $5 million solatium award is the appropriate baseline for children of deceased victims, as established in Heiser. See Heiser, 466 F. … Cir. 2018) (“District Court judges have discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(e) to grant solatium awards based on the particular facts of each case, subject to abuse-of-discretion review for errors of law, clearly erroneous

Timbisha Shoshone Tribe v. Salazar

766 F. Supp. 2d 175 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 1, 2011

Under Rule 12(b)(1), Defendants contend that Plaintiffs cannot establish jurisdiction because (1) Defendants have not waived sovereign immunity and (2) Plaintiffs’ takings claim must be brought in the Court of Federal Claims … Library of Congress, 750 F.2d 89, 102 (D.C.Cir.1984) (“It is well-established that sovereign immunity does not bar suits for specific relief against government officials where the challenged actions of the officials are alleged

Leopold v. Pittman

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 20, 2022

the merits, which courts may render only after jurisdiction has been established”); Kiakombua v. … As an initial matter, the 36 USCP Directives that do not qualify as security information also do not qualify as “public records,” as that term has been described by the D.C. Circuit.

In re Investigation of World Arrangements with Relation to the Production, Transportation, Refining & Distribution of Petroleum

13 F.R.D. 280 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 10, 1952

It is well established that only such documents are to be produced which are in the possession and/or control of the subpoenaed person.” … The purpose here is to establish that there is a true objection by the foreign sovereign, and not a premature expectation by the movant party.

Chambers v. Gesell

120 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 21, 1988

The principles underlying this established doctrine suggest that the existence of judicial immunity, an absolute defense, is appropriately considered in determining whether to allow a plaintiff to dismiss a suit without prejudice … The principle of judicial immunity is well established and requires no elaborate citation of authority. Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335, 351 , 20 L.Ed. 646 (1871); Randall v.

Tomasello v. Rubin

920 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 1996

In that decision, Judge Paul Friedman determined that “[i]n enacting the ADEA, Congress not only did not expressly waive sovereign immunity with respect to retaliation claims, it clearly declined to do so,” and dismissed … It is well established that sovereign immunity is waived only when the intent of Congress is “unequivocally expressed” in the applicable statute, United States v.

Ben-Rafael v. Islamic Republic of Iran

540 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 25, 2008

Terrorism Exception to Sovereign Immunity Sovereign entities are immune from suit in U.S. courts unless one of the FSIA’s statutory exceptions applies. See 28 U.S.C. § 1604 . … See, e.g., Sisso II, 2007 WL 2007582 , at *7 (finding that a “bombing qualifies as an act of extrajudicial killing”).

Hunter v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 2, 2020

Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim, however, does not clearly refer to this particular grievance, see Am. … Sovereign immunity can be waived where: (1) Congress “unequivocally expresses its intent to abrogate that immunity,” or (2) “a state may voluntarily waive its immunity by making a clear declaration that it intends to submit

Salazar v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 18, 2020

While foreign states are generally immune from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts, see 28 U.S.C. … Plaintiffs have also established that Iran qualifies under the “state sponsor of terrorism” exception set forth in § 1605A.

United States v. Poindexter

727 F. Supp. 1488 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 1989

Two replacement grand jurors were qualified, one in December 1989 and one in January 1988, after the immunized testimony had been taken before the congressional committees. … He does remember Poindexter’s using the phrase "the buck stops here,” but no relationship of that comment to other subjects was established. 26 .

Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Miski

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 25, 2010

, see Dec. 9, 2008 Order & Memorandum at 6-7 (Oberdorfer, J.), noting that parties claiming immunity, as the plaintiffs do here, also carry the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that they are entitled … In that earlier opinion, Judge Oberdorfer concluded that the plaintiffs did not 8 meet their burden of establishing that they were entitled to immunity because "it appear

Valencia v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2011

FINDINGS OF FACT Under the FSIA, a court cannot simply enter default judgment against a foreign state, but must, out of respect for the principle of sovereign immunity, ensure that plaintiffs “establish [their] … The actions of defendants here certainly qualify under this standard.

Merriweather v. Lappin

District Court, District of Columbia · May 11, 2010

immunity. … Because the record is insufficiently developed, the Court expressly declines to address the defendants’ claim of entitlement to qualified immunity. -5-