UD
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Court Case
Relationships:6
Events:0
Library:8
Confidence:
95%
Key Facts
Type
Court Case
Sector
Not specified
Industry
Not specified
Status
Draft
Country
Not specified
Website
Also Known As
D.D.C.US District Court for D.C.United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Tags
No tags
Overall Confidence
95%
Internal Notes
No notes
Key Information
Positions
No positions added
Case Number
Not specified
Court
Not specified
Jurisdiction
Not specified
Filing Date
Not specified
Case Status
Not specified
Case Type
Not specified
Plaintiffs
No plaintiffs listed
Defendants
No defendants listed
About
A federal court that heard the defamation lawsuit CAIR v. Clarion Fund, involving allegations of false light invasion of privacy and defamation related to the film 'Obsession.'
Key Relationships
Rebekah Mercer
subpoenaed
Rebekah Mercer was subpoenaed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as part of investigations into Cambridge Analytica's role in the misuse of Facebook data during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Since 2018
Guy Rodgers
appealed_to
While no direct case involving Guy Rodgers has been confirmed, ACT! for America and its affiliates have been involved in legal actions that have been appealed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Rodgers' role as Executive Director could implicate him in future appeals related to civil rights or defamation cases.
Howard Kohr
appealed_to
Howard Kohr and AIPAC have appealed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in multiple legal proceedings, including challenges to FOIA requests and the Rosen-Weissman case. The court has been a key venue for AIPAC's legal battles.
Since 2005
Clarion Fund / Clarion Project
appealed_to
After the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed CAIR's defamation lawsuit against the Clarion Fund in 2010, CAIR appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Clarion participated in the appeal process, arguing that the dismissal should be upheld on First Amendment grounds.
Since 2010
Barre Seid
appealed_to
Barre Seid and his associated entities, including the Marble Freedom Trust, have been the subject of legal challenges in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. These cases have sought to enforce transparency and accountability in political spending, directly targeting Seid's funding strategies. Furthermore, if the IRS or FEC were to rule against Barre Seid or the Marble Freedom Trust regarding matters such as the $1.6 billion transfer, Seid could appeal such a decision to this court, which frequently handles cases involving federal regulatory actions.
Richard Perry
targeted
Richard Perry and Perry Capital were central figures in the high-profile lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. government over the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Perry's firm argued that the government's 'net worth sweep' of profits was an unconstitutional taking of private property, and Perry personally lobbied for judicial intervention to end the conservatorship.
Since 2013