Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersca4

10,000+ results

6.41s

  • Hawkins v. PepsiCo, Inc.

    203 F.3d 274 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 15, 2000

    See Hartsell v. Duplex Prods., Inc., 123 F.3d 766, 768 (4th Cir. 1997); Brown v. CSX Transp., Inc., 18 F.3d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1994). … See Johnson v.

    Cited 421 timesPublished
  • Allen O. Davis v. Valley Camp Coal Company Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

    48 F.3d 1215 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 2, 1995

    Davis petitions for review of a Benefits Review Board (Board) decision vacating and remanding for further consideration the administrative law judge's (ALJ) decision denying his claim for black lung benefits. … See Eggers v. Clinchfield Coal Co., 11 F.3d 35, 38 (4th Cir.1993).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Wagner v. County Com'rs of Frederick County

    91 F. 969 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 7, 1899

    Weikel v. Cate, 58 Md. 105 . … Shivers v. Witson, 5 Har. & J. 132 ; Owings v. Worthington, 10 Gill & J. 293; Clark v. Bryan, 16 Md. 176 ; Fahey v. Mottu, 67 Md. 250 , 10 Atl. 68 ; Kane v. State, 70 Md. 546 , 17 Alt. 557.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Eaton v. SS Export Challenger

    376 F.2d 725 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Apr 6, 1967

    Co. v. Schmidt, 241 U.S. 245 , 36 S.Ct. 581 , 60 L.Ed. 982 (1916) (Holmes, J.). 3 See also, Gardner v. The L. N. Danzler, 177 F.Supp. 736, 742 (E.D.Va.1959). … He, nevertheless, remained on board working, intending to sign new articles for the next voyage.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Kelly v. Gonzales

    216 F. App'x 391 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 8, 2007

    We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. … . § 1003.2 (c)(2) (2006) (establishing a ninety-day time limitation for filing a motion to reopen); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 , 112 S.Ct. 719 , 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992) (setting forth standard of review).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Okello v. Gonzales

    182 F. App'x 173 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 12, 2006

    We have reviewed the record and the Board’s orders and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying either Okello’s motion to reopen or her motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (a) (2006); INS v. … Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 , 112 S.Ct. 719 , 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992); Jean v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 475 , 481 (4th Cir.2006). We therefore deny both petitions for review for the reasons stated by the Board.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • United States v. George R. Blick

    408 F.3d 162 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 27, 2005

    In United States v. … Brown, 232 F.3d 399, 403 (4th Cir.2000); see also United States v. Broughton-Jones, 71 F.3d 1143, 1147 (4th Cir.1995) (same), United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir.1992) (same).

    Cited 729 timesPublished
  • Consolidated Textile Corp. v. Shipp

    41 F.2d 479 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 10, 1930

    This beaver board that covered the square hole was not sufficient to sustain the weight of a man. … E. 298 ; Pope v. Railroad, 195 N. C. page 67, 141 S. E. 350 ; De Honey v. Harding (C. C. A.) 300 F. 696 ; Stanwood v. Clancey, 106 Me. 72 , 75 A. 293 , 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1213; Silverthorne v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Cole v. Teamsters Local 391

    359 F. App'x 377 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Dec 30, 2009

    COLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TEAMSTERS LOCAL 391; DONNY BROWN, Defendants - Appellees. … Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007); see United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009) (discussing Bowles and the appeal periods under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)).

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Trading Associates Corp. v. Magruder

    112 F.2d 779 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 10, 1940

    Schafer v. Helvering, 299 U.S. 171 , 57 S.Ct. 148 , 81 L.Ed. 101 ; Hammitt v. Commissioner, 3 Cir., 79 F.2d 494 ; Seeley v. Helvering, 2 Cir., 77 F.2d 323 ; Wilson v. … Commissioner, 10 *782 Cir., 76 F.2d 476 ; Leach Corporation v. Blacklidge, D.C., 23 F.Supp. 622 . This line of decisions has also been followed in a number of cases decided by the Board of Tax Appeals.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Jeremy Marks v. Thomas Dann

    600 F. App'x 81 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jan 21, 2015

    Barbre v. … See Manders v. Brown, 643 A.2d 931, 943 (Md. Ct. Spec.

    Cited 17 timesUnpublished
  • Virginia ex rel. Virginia Department of Conservation & Economic Development v. Watt

    741 F.2d 37 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 25, 1984

    In Tug Valley Recovery Center v. … Jaward, Corporation v. Watt, 564 F.Supp. at 799 .

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Birchfield v. Eastern Associated Coal Co.

    54 F.3d 772 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 18, 1995

    Amigo Smokeless Coal Co. v. Director, OWCP, 642 F.2d 68, 69 (4th Cir.1981). … Franklin, 957 F.2d 355, 357 (7th Cir.1992); see O'Keeffe v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Barry J. Maron, Dr. v. United States of America Stephen E. Epstein, Dr. Lameh Fananapazir, Dr. Edward Korn, Dr. Neil Epstein, Dr.

    126 F.3d 317 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 18, 1997

    See 28 U.S.C. 2680(h); see also, e.g., Johnson v. Carter, 983 F.2d at 1323 n. 9 (dealing with defamation, for which the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity); Brown v. … See Schrob v. Catterson, 967 F.2d 929, 936 (3d Cir.1992) 5 ; Hamrick v. Franklin, 931 F.2d 1209, 1211 (7th Cir.1991); Brown v. Armstrong, 949 F.2d 1007, 1012 (8th Cir.1991); Green v.

    Cited 85 timesPublished
  • George Leary Const. Co. v. Matson

    272 F. 461 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 1, 1921

    Co. v. Federal Con. Co. (D. C.) 148 Fed. 290 ; Ellis v. U. S., 206 U. S. 246 -259, 27 Sup. Ct. 600, 51 L. Ed. 1047 , 11 Ann. Cas. 589. By Act March 15, 1915, c. 153, § 20 (Comp. … Roebling’s Sons Co. v. Erickson (C. C. A.) 261 Fed. 986 , and intimated in Chelentis v. Luckenbach, 247 U. S. 372 , 38 Sup. Ct. 501, 62 L. Ed. 1171 .

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Wood Preserving Corporation of Baltimore, Inc. v. United States

    347 F.2d 117 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 15, 1965

    The minutes of the previously referred to meeting of the taxpayer’s board of directors on May 4,1955, stated that in return for his financial assistance, Mr. … See, e. g., Nassau Lens Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 308 F.2d 39, 47 (2 Cir. 1962); Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. v. United States, 240 F.2d 467, 470 (7 Cir. 1957); Estate of Miller v.

    Cited 35 timesPublished
  • Virmani v. Novant Health Inc.

    259 F.3d 284 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Aug 1, 2001

    Following that hearing, the Medical Board voted to terminate Vir-mani’s medical staff privileges. Presbyterian’s Board of Trustee’s upheld that decision on January 19,1996. … As a result of the Second Peer Review, the Medical Board and the Board of Trustees again decided to terminate Virmani’s staff privileges.

    Cited 47 timesPublished
  • United States v. Quantrell Reid

    861 F.3d 523 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Jun 28, 2017

    ARGUED: Richard Lamb Brown, Jr., LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD L. BROWN, JR., Monroe, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anthony Joseph Enright, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. … See IGEN Int’l, Inc. v.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • Students Against Apartheid Coalition v. O'Neil

    838 F.2d 735 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 8, 1988

    The Student Groups, in an effort to convince the University Board of Visitors to change its policy of investing in South African corporations, constructed shanties on the Lawn outside the Rotunda where the Board meets. … Students Against Apartheid Coalition v. O’Neil, 660 F.Supp. 333 (W.D.Va.1987).

    Cited 1 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.