Case law

Stephen Manchester v. Orlyn C. Lewis

507 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 25, 1974

Martin, 480 F.2d 705, 708-709 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1075 , 94 S.Ct. 592 , 38 L.Ed.2d 482 (1973); George v. Board of Educ., 472 F.2d 132, 133 (6th Cir. 1972); Orr v. … Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 , Board of Trustees of Arkansas A & M College v.

Church v. Harnit

35 F.2d 499 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 6, 1929

No formal action by the board was necessary. It is sufficient if there was a clear and well-defined understanding. Chabot & Richard Co. v. Chabot, 109 Me. 403 , 84 A. 892 ; Young v. U. S. Mort. & Tr. Co., 214 N. … , this does not wholly invalidate the action of the board.

Black Motor Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

125 F.2d 977 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 1942

The fact that the issue was not raised in the petition to the Board is immaterial and, under the circumstances here present, we have jurisdiction of the issue. Scripps v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 96 F.2d 492 ; Hormel v. … Prime Securities Corporation v. United States, 6 Cir., 119 F.2d 939 . Decision of the Board is affirmed.

Jose Luna-Benalcazar v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

414 F.2d 254 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 31, 1969

No appeal was taken to the Board of Immigration Appeals. … Novinc v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 371 F.2d 272 (7th Cir. 1967); Chul Hi Kim v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 357 F.2d 904 (7th Cir. 1966); Bregman v.

Brandywine Explosives & Supply v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs

790 F.3d 657 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 2015

First, we note that the Benefits Review Board has statutory authority to review Department of Labor regulations for consistency with the Black Lung Benefits Act. Gibas v. Saginaw Min. … On factual issues, the court, like the Board, determines “whether the ALJ—not the Board—had substantial evidence upon which to base his or her decision.” Jonida Trucking, Inc. v.

Alma Delia Reyes Galeana v. Merrick B. Garland

94 F.4th 555 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 4, 2024

The Board of Immigration Appeals disagreed  No. 23-3664 Reyes Galeana v. Garland Page 2 and denied her application. … Our focus is on the Board’s opinion, as informed by any of the Immigration Judge’s reasoning adopted therein. Khalili v. Holder, 557 F.3d 429, 435 (6th Cir. 2009).

Rondot v. Rogers Tp.

99 F. 202 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 2, 1900

Bank v. Dandridge, 12 Wheat. 64 , 6 L. Ed. 552 ; Bridgford v. City of Tuscumbia (C. C.) 16 Fed. 910 ; School Dist. v. Clark, 90 Mich. 437 , 51 N. W. 529 ; Taymouth Tp. v. Koehler, 35 Mich. 22 ; 1 Dill. Mun. … Town of Coloma v. Eaves, 92 U. S. 484 , 23 L. Ed. 579 ; Ashley v. Board, 16 U. S. App. 656, 8 C. C. A. 455 , 60 Fed. 55 ; Risley v. Village of Howell, 12 C. C. A. 219 -222, 64 Fed. 453 ; City of Cadillac v.

United States v. Larry Darnel Gordon, Also Known as Larry Brown

9 F.3d 110 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 5, 1993

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Darnel GORDON, also known as Larry Brown, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-1335. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Ex parte Thieret

268 F. 472 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 3, 1920

Cas. 1918B, 856; Franke v. Murray (C. C. A. 8) 248 Fed. 865, 867, 868 , 160 C. C. A. 623 , L. R. A. 1918E, 1015, Ann. Cas. 1918D, 98; Angelus v. Sullivan (C. C. A. 2) 246 Fed. 54, 60 , 158 C. C. A. 280 . … Franke v. Murray, supra, 248 Fed. 865, 869 , 160 C. C. A. 623 , L. R. A. 1918E, 1015, Ann. Cas. 1918D, 98; Napore v. Rowe (C. C. A. 9) 256 Fed. 832, 834 , 168 C. C. A. 178 ; Arbitman v. Woodside (C. C.

Samira G. Hana v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General

400 F.3d 472 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 14, 2005

Under this deferential standard, we may not reverse the Board simply because we disagree with its understanding of the facts. Koliada v. INS, 259 F.3d 482, 486 (6th Cir.2001). … Rather, we must find that the evidence compels a finding that the Board was wrong. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Ashland Oil & Refining Co.

99 F.2d 588 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 18, 1938

This principle has been repeatedly invoked by the Commissioner and applied by the Board. Carter Publications, Inc., v. Commissioner, 28 B.T.A. 160 ; Warner Co. v. … It has so been considered by the Board. Muskegon Motor Specialties Company v. Commissioner, 35 B.T.A. 851 .

United States v. Edward Stulga

584 F.2d 142 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 1978

In Graves v. … Judge Brown did not choose to voluntarily withdraw and overruled the motion. No prejudice is shown and we do not find any abuse of discretion on the part of Judge Brown. Affirmed. 1 .

Marshall Clark v. Lewis B. Stevens, Warden

291 F.2d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 9, 1961

Christianson v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 89 F.2d 40 ; Freedman v. Looney, 10 Cir., 210 F.2d 56, 57 . The appellant left his home State of residence and failed to report to the Board of Parole, as required by law. … This occasioned the Board’s revocation of his parole; and there is certainly no abuse of discretion by the Board.

Marvin Stone v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

13 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 6, 1994

Foti v. … The narrow holding of Giova v.

Long v. Kentucky

80 F. App'x 410 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 21, 2003

See Long v. Smith, 663 F.2d 18, 19 (6th Cir.1981). His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Long v. … In Greene v.

Kales v. Commissioner

101 F.2d 35 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 12, 1939

In Foss v. … Croker v. Commissioner, 27 B.T.A. 588 , cited by the dissenting Board member.

United States v. Peter Hanlon Irons

369 F.2d 557 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 30, 1966

On July 27, 1961, appellant was classified 1-A by local board 55, and was notified by the board on August 14, 1961 of his 1-A classification, but intentionally failed to appeal. *558 On January 25, 1963, the local board sent … [See: Falbo v. United States, 320 U.S. 549, 553 , 64 S.Ct. 346 , 88 L.Ed. 305 (1944); Moore v. United States, 302 F.2d 929 (9th Cir. 1962); United States v.

Kottmyer v. Maas

436 F.3d 684 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 18, 2006

Kottmyer, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Aimee MAAS; Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center; Hamilton County Board of Commissioners, and Debbie Ayer, Defendants-Appellees. No. 05-3033. … See Lillard v. Shelby County Board of Education, 76 F.3d 716, 726-27 (6th Cir.1996).

Charles Hollis, Jr. v. Chestnut Bend Homeowners Ass'n

760 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 29, 2014

Three members comprised the ARC, all of whom the board appointed but none of whom were members of the board. … One board member acted as a liaison between the ARC and the board, and Turner acted as a liaison between the ARC and the homeowners.

National Board of Young Men's Christian Associations, A/K/A Ymca of the U.S.A. v. The Flint Young Men's Christian Association of Flint, Michigan

764 F.2d 199 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1985

The plaintiff, relying on Omega Importing Corp. v. … In Omega, Judge Friendly reaffirmed a standard first enunciated by Judge Frank in Hamilton Watch Co. v.