Skip to main content
· 6/8/2015

Abraham v. Burwell

Citations

  • 110 F. Supp. 3d 25
  • 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73623
  • 2015 WL 3544651

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that “the [c]ourt need not consider prong [four]” in assessing whether the District of Columbia is a proper venue where “Maryland [wa]s the proper venue” under the first three prongs
  • noting that courts may review “material outside of the pleadings” in assessing venue
  • stating that venue was not proper in the District of Columbia under the second prong even though records relating to the EEO investigation were retained there because the “master set” of the plaintiffs employment records was maintained in Maryland
  • taking judicial notice of an agency’s location for venue analysis
  • taking judicial notice of agency location in venue challenge
  • taking judicial notice of agency location in venue challenge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Judge James E. Boasberg

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.