Case law

Welch Ex Rel. SAIC v. Havenstein

553 F. App'x 54 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 30, 2014

13-2648-cv Welch v. … Shareholder derivative suits may also be brought “where the subject of the derivative suit is not a decision of the board.” Rales v. Blasband, 634 A.2d 927, 934 (Del. 1993).

United States v. Pinto-Mejia

720 F.2d 248 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 14, 1983

V 1981). … E.g., United States v. Doyle, 348 F.2d 715, 718-19 (2d Cir.) (quoting United States v.

Truck Drivers Local Union No. 807 v. Regional Import & Export Trucking Co.

944 F.2d 1037 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 24, 1991

For instance, in Vaca v. … In Hines v.

New York Bus Tours, Inc. v. Kheel

864 F.2d 9 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 21, 1988

Parochial Bus Systems, Inc. v. … See Olympia & York Florida Equity Corp. v. Gould, 776 F.2d 42 (2d Cir.1985); Americas Ins. Co. v.

Boleslavs Maikovskis v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

773 F.2d 435 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 17, 1985

Fedorenko v. … The Validity of the Board’s Finding In reviewing a BIA order of deportation, courts are required to give substantial deference to the Board’s' findings of fact. Wong Wing Hang v. INS, 360 F.2d 715, 717 (2d Cir.1966).

Cellular Telephone Company, Doing Business as at & T Wireless Services v. The Town of Oyster Bay and the Town Board of the Town of Oyster Bay

166 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 29, 1999

This standard of review is deferential, and we may neither engage in our own fact-finding nor supplant the Town Board’s reasonable determinations. PrimeCo Personal Communications, L.P. v. … See Sprint Spectrum L.P. v.

United States v. Howard R. Delfin

419 F.2d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Oct 10, 1969

In Gearey v. … See Estep v. United States, 327 U.S. 114, 122 , 66 S.Ct. 423 , 90 L.Ed. 567 (1946).

Olson v. United States

68 F.2d 8 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Dec 18, 1933

Maul v. United States, 274 U. S. 501 , 47 S. Ct. 735 , 71 L. Ed. 1171 ; Wood v. United States, 16 Pet. (41 U. S.) 342, 10 L. Ed. 987 ; Awalt v. United States, 47 F.(2d) 477 (C. C. A. 3); Alksne v. … on board.

Csx Transportation, Inc. v. United Transportation Union

879 F.2d 990 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 7, 1989

R.R. v. … Ry. v.

Kurtz v. Belle Hat Lining Co.

280 F. 277 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 10, 1922

Despite the warning of Justice Brown in McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U. S. 419, 427 , 12 Sup. Ct. 76, 35 L. … Miehle, etc., Co. v. Whitlock, 223 Fed. 647, 650 , 139 C. C. A. 201 . Hindsight, or wisdom after the fact, has always been looked upon with disfavor; e. g., Faries Co. v. Brown, 121 Fed. 547, 550 , 57 C. C.

Allen v. Antal

665 F. App'x 9 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jan 14, 2016

See Brown v. … Wright v. Smith, 21 F.3d 496, 501 (2d Cir. 1994) (quoting Moffitt v.

Weinstein v. Black Diamond S. S. Corp.

40 F.2d 590 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 7, 1930

Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation, 280 U. S. 320 , 50 S. Ct. 118 , 74 L. … Cm v. Garfield (C. C.

Porr v. Daman

299 F. App'x 84 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Nov 7, 2008

Porr alleges that the school’s principal, its superintendent, and others at the Board of Education engaged in a pattern of retaliatory harassment against him after he spoke out about certain grievances, generally about a … Porr also brought claims under Monell v. Dep’t of Soc.

Minzer v. Keegan

218 F.3d 144 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jul 10, 2000

Case Co. v. … See TSC Indus., Inc. v.

United States v. J. Michael Robilotto, Louis D. Spagnola and Anthony v. Civitello, Defendants

828 F.2d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 11, 1987

Brown met with Civitello to negotiate an agreement with Local 294 to use local teamster drivers on the film. Brown and Civitello reached agreement as to wages and fringe benefits. … Brown agreed to hire four cover drivers. Filming began in January 1981.

Williams v. Walsh

558 F.2d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 27, 1977

This is made clear by Swan v. Board of Higher Education, supra. … There is a definite distinction between suing a board, as an entity, and suing the individual members of that board. See, e. g., Gay Students Organization v.

Galloway v. Town of Greece

681 F.3d 20 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 17, 2012

10-3635-cv Galloway v. … Giordano v. Mkt. Am., Inc., 599 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 2010) (quoting McBride v. BIC Consumer Prods. Mfg.

David Gambardella v. G. Fox & Co.

716 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Aug 9, 1983

See, e.g., Brown v. Marquette Savings & Loan Assoc., 686 F.2d 608, 614 (7th Cir.1982); Zamarippa v. Cy’s Car Sales, Inc., 674 F.2d 877 , 879 (11th Cir.1982); Dzadovsky v. … Although we recognize that the Board’s commentary to draft regulations published under TILSRA is relevant to interpretive issues under TILA, see Anderson Bros. Ford v.

Richard Samuels v. Air Transport Local 504

992 F.2d 12 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 21, 1993

The union urged that a prior controlling “systems board” determination precluded the Field Board from ruling in Samuels’ favor. … Its proof of the “systems board” determination was the testimony of a union representative to the Field Board.

Katz v. McAulay

438 F.2d 1058 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Feb 11, 1971

The rule’s focus upon a demonstrable harm rather than an undifferentiated fear of disturbance distinguishes plaintiffs’ action from Scoville v. Board of Education, 425 F.2d 10 (7 Cir. 1970). … In the first of these, Eisner v.