Case law

Rondini v. Bunn

District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jan 13, 2020

Brown v. Best Foods, A Div. of CPC Int’l., Inc., 169 F.R.D. 385, 387 (N.D. Ala. 1996). … Brown, 169 F.R.D. at 387. Indeed, “the ability to answer hypothetical questions is ‘[t]he essential difference’ between expert and lay witnesses.” United States v.

Akers Motor Lines, Inc. v. Malone Freight Lines, Inc.

88 F. Supp. 654 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Feb 10, 1950

Switchmen’s Union of North America v. National Mediation Board, 320 U.S. 297, 301 , 64 S.Ct. 95 , 88 L.Ed. 61 . 4 . … . § 151 et seq., see, e. g., Switchmen’s Union of North America v. National Mediation Board, 320 U.S. 297 , 64 S.Ct. 95 , 88 L.Ed. 61 ; Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Texas & P. Ry.

In Re Soliman

134 F. Supp. 2d 1238 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Feb 15, 2001

Richardson v. Reno, 180 F.3d 1311, 1314 (11th Cir.1999). An alien may challenge such actions by appealing them to the Board of Immigration Appeals. … See Adras v.

Knight v. State of Alabama

900 F. Supp. 272 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Sep 25, 1995

United States v. Fordice, 505 U.S. 717 , 732 n. 6, 112 S.Ct. 2727 , 2737 n. 6 120 L.Ed.2d 575 (1992) (citing Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. … v.

Walton v. Secretary Veterans Administration

187 F. Supp. 3d 1317 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · May 11, 2016

Beamon v . Brown, 125 F.3d 965, 972 (6th Cir.1977); see 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (a) (“The [Veteran’s Appeals Court] shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review decisions of the [BVA].”) … Brown v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 835 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976); see also 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c).

Morton

District Court, N.D. Alabama · Apr 29, 2026

v. Malaysia Int’l Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422, 430–31 (2007). … Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277, 285 (2014).

Eagle Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States

331 F. Supp. 80 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Sep 9, 1971

E. g-., Malone Freight Lines v. United States, 107 F.Supp. 946, 949 (N.D.Ala.1952), aff’d 344 U.S. 925 , 73 S.Ct. 497 , 97 L.Ed. 712 , and Floyd and Beasley Transfer Company v. … board and hard board industries, (3) Parts, attachments and accessories for the commodities described in (1) and (2) above, between points in Jefferson and' Talladega Counties, Alabama and Washington County, Oreg., on the

Williams v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

947 F. Supp. 2d 1234 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · May 20, 2013

Mascolo-Brown is a valid comparator. In his affidavit, Mr. … Maniccia v. Brown, 171 F.3d 1364,1368 (11th Cir.1999). Here, Mr. Williams merely cites to three lines of deposition testimony about Ms.

Greater Birmingham Ministries v. Merrill

284 F. Supp. 3d 1253 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jan 10, 2018

Palmer v. … V.

Heard v. Hannah

51 F. Supp. 3d 1129 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Sep 24, 2014

See Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 571 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … See Brown v. Georgia Dep’t of Rev., 881 F.2d 1018, 1028 (11th Cir.1989); Lassiter v. Covington, 861 F.2d 680, 683-84 (11th Cir. 1988); Haddler v. Walker County, Ala., 2014 WL 2465322 , at *4 n. 3 (N.D.Ala.

Looney v. Moore

18 F. Supp. 3d 1338 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · May 12, 2014

See Konrady v. … Planned Parenthood of Ind., Inc. v. Comm’r of Indiana State Dept. Health, 699 F.3d 962, 985 (7th Cir.2012) (citing Wyeth v.

Henry v. City of Gadsden, Ala.

715 F. Supp. 1065 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jun 30, 1989

In Martin v. … V. The guiding legal principles are set forth in Birmingham Reverse Discrimination Litig., supra.

Cheatwood v. City of Oxford

785 F. Supp. 926 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Feb 4, 1992

ML Healthy City School District Board of Education v. … See e.g., Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2705 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). 44 . This defense is available only to the officials and not to the City. Owen v.

Clear Creek, Inc. v. Royal American Corp. (In Re International Resorts, Inc.)

46 B.R. 405 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jan 19, 1984

Robert Holloway, a member of the Board of Directors of RAC, became acting president of IRI. Rolfe McCollister, Chairman of the Board of RAC, became Chairman of the Board of IRI. … This contract, by its terms, did not completely divest IRI’s Board of Directors of its management authority, 10 as did the bylaws in Roach v. Bynum.

Brady v. Perry

910 F. Supp. 1564 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Jan 8, 1996

Brown v. City of Clewiston, 848 F.2d 1534 , 1540 n. 12 (11th Cir.1988). IV. … See Alexander v.

Chalal v. Northwest Medical Center, Inc.

147 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Mar 31, 2000

See Hickman, v. Winston County Hospital Board, 508 So.2d at 238. … Hickman v. Winston County Hospital Board, 508 So.2d at 238 (citations omitted).

Pension & Employee Stock Ownership Plan Administrative Committee of Community Bancshares, Inc. v. Patterson

547 F. Supp. 2d 1230 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Mar 31, 2008

See Bannistor v. Ullman, 287 F.3d 394, 401 (5th Cir.2002). Patterson held influential positions at Bancshares as its founding Chairman of the Board of Directors, CEO and President. … V.

Battle v. Liberty National Life Insurance

660 F. Supp. 1449 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · May 22, 1987

In Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. … See, for example, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 501 F.2d 383 (4th Cir.1974).

Marvin

District Court, N.D. Alabama · Nov 12, 2025

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286 (1986)); see also Ashcroft v. … Price v. M & H Valve Co., 177 F. App’x 1, 14 (11th Cir. 2006).

Carter v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.

345 F. Supp. 2d 1296 · District Court, N.D. Alabama · Oct 15, 2004

More important to this case than the Eleventh Circuit’s discussion in Williams of the relationship between Kemper and BST, is the fact that Williams reiterated what the Eleventh Circuit had earlier held in Brown v. … In Brown the Eleventh Circuit was the first appellate court to recognize the problem inherent in Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v.