Case law

Lih Y. YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, Defendant-Appellee

828 F.2d 235 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 9, 1987

See Bristow v. Daily Press, Inc., 770 F.2d 1251, 1255 (4th Cir.1985); EEOC v. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, 698 F.2d 633 , 672 (4th Cir.1983). … The defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Brown v.

Kansas City, St. L. & C. R. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

131 F.2d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 12, 1942

The Board (1) disallowed the claim for refund, and (2) determined a deficiency of $28,875. There is no further contention before us as to the Board’s disallowing the Lessor’s claim for refund. See United States v. … Co. v.

Harry L. Cumberland v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary

227 F.2d 310 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 9, 1955

Spence v. Warden, 204 Md. 661 , 103 A.2d 345 . Nor can the extent or legality of his initial detention. Bowie v. Warden, 190 Md. 728 , 60 A.2d 185 ; Taylor v. Warden, 201 Md. 656 , 92 A.2d 757 ; Fisher v. … Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 460-465 , 73 S.Ct. 397 , 97 L.Ed. 469 . Appeal dismissed.

Acie Blankenship v. Beatrice Pocahontas Coal Company Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

45 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 29, 1994

Acie BLANKENSHIP, Petitioner, v. BEATRICE POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY; Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents. No. 94-1300. … Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Blankenship v.

United States v. Capers

61 F.3d 1100 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 10, 1995

If he could not find her, he would get it from Lisa Jackson, Gardenia Jackson or Brown.) … According to Salone, the Holly Hill ring included defendants Deatrice Brown, Samuel Brown, Germaine Robinson, Vincent Robinson, Travyuis Cokely, Lisa Jackson and Peter Johnson, 4 while the Ridgeville ring included defendants

Farley v. Skeen, Warden

208 F.2d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 9, 1953

See Farley v. Skeen, D.C., 113 F.Supp. 736 . … Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 458 , 73 S.Ct. 397 . We would accordingly affirm the decision below if the case were properly before us.

Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Wainwright

161 F. App'x 328 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 18, 2006

Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Board. … See Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Wainwright, No. 04-0735 (B.R.B. June 16, 2005).

Deel v. D O & W Coal Co., Inc.

37 F.3d 1493 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 19, 1994

Emit DEEL, Petitioner, v. D O & W COAL COMPANY, INCORPORATED; Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor; Old Republic Insurance Company, Respondents. No. 94-1239. … Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Deel v.

Lester v. Dorothy Mae Coal Co.

37 F.3d 1494 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 6, 1994

On Petition for Review of An Order of the Benefits Review Board. (89-3093-BLA) Lorene Lester, Petitioner Pro Se. … Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Lester v.

Donna A. Granahan v. Dr. Jean Pearson

782 F.2d 30 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 8, 1985

This court in Brown v. American Broadcasting Co., 704 F.2d 1296 (4th Cir.1983) stated that, in Virginia, a statute of limitations does not accrue separately for each set of damages resulting from a wrongful act. … Brown concerned an action for damages stemming from alleged defamation and conspiracy to injure plaintiffs reputation.

Betty B Coal Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs

249 F. App'x 981 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Oct 9, 2007

PER CURIAM: Betty B Coal Company seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s order requiring it to reimburse the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund (“Trust Fund”) … Our *982 review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. See Betty B Coal Co. v.

Phillips v. LCI International, Inc.

190 F.3d 609 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 15, 1999

.”); Glazer v. … See Leventhal v.

Alfred Lowe v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Sewell Coal Company

56 F.3d 61 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 25, 1995

Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Lowe v. … DOWCP, No. 93-392-BLA (Benefits Review Board, May 13, 1994).

Valcourt Building Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

142 F. App'x 668 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 24, 2005

For example, in NLRB v. … Mead Coated Board, Inc., 337 NLRB 497, 497-98 (2002) (citations omitted); see also St. Elizabeth Cmty. Hosp. v.

McCrary ex rel. McCrary v. Runyon

515 F.2d 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 15, 1975

Thereafter, such legal problems became stereotyped until the landmark decision in 1954 of Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 , 74 S.Ct. 686 , 98 L.Ed. 873 (1954). … See Graham v.

Estrella v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service

22 F. App'x 347 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 11, 2002

Teofista Estrella petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her application for asylum. … See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1252 (b)(4)(B) (West 1999); Huaman-Cornelio v. Board of Immigration Appeals, 979 F.2d 995 (4th Cir.1992). We accordingly affirm the Board’s order.

Daulton v. Affeldt

678 F.2d 487 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 17, 1982

Healthy City Board of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 568 , 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977); Perry v. … Kim, supra; Williams v.

Elmer Hess v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

23 F.3d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 20, 1994

Elmer HESS, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE of WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, United States Department of Labor, Respondent. No. 93-2257. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 18, 1994. … Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Hess v.

Clark v. Eastern Associated Coal Corp.

117 F. App'x 873 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 21, 2004

Clark seeks review of a decision and order of the Benefits Review Board (“Board”) affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-45 (2000). … Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. See Clark v.

Hosey v. Valley Camp Coal Co.

212 F. App'x 244 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 10, 2007

Hosey seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2000). … Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Board. Hosey v.