Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. United Association Of Journeymen And Apprentices Of The Plumbing And Pipefitting Industry Of The United States And Canada

424 F.2d 390 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 8, 1970

(BNA) 2960 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF the PLUMBING AND PIPEFITTING INDUSTRY OF the UNITED STATES AND CANADA, LOCAL 633, AFL-CIO, Respondent. … Radio Officers' Union v. N.L.R.B., 347 U.S. 17, 41, 42 , 74 S.Ct. 323, 336 , 98 L.Ed. 455 * * *.' NLRB v. Animated Displays Co., 327 F.2d 230 , 232 (6th Cir. 1964). 19 See also NLRB v.

Nikolay Kolov v. Merrick B. Garland

78 F.4th 911 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2023

of such order by the Board[.]” … In Nasrallah, the Board both affirmed an immigration judge’s order finding an immigrant  No. 22-3760 Kolov v.

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.

Robert Anthony Reed v. James A. Rhodes

549 F.2d 1046 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 20, 1976

For the law on this subject see Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 , 95 S.Ct. 3112 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1069 (1974), reversing Bradley v. Milliken, 484 F.2d 215 (6th Cir. 1973). … Northcross v. Board of Educ. of the Memphis City Schools, 463 F.2d 329 (6th Cir. 1972); see also 466 F.2d 890 , 892 and n. at 896. In NAACP 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.

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.

Verville v. International Ass'n of Machinists Workers

520 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 1975

An airline System Board of Adjustment does not have jurisdiction of a dispute between a union and a union member. Brady v. … Semancik v.

The Procter & Gamble Company v. Federal Trade Commission

358 F.2d 74 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 18, 1966

United States v. Philadelphia Nat'l Bank, 374 U.S. 321 , 83 S.Ct. 1715 , 10 L.Ed.2d 915 (1963); Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962). … United States v. Continental Can Co., 378 U.S. 441 , 84 S.Ct. 1738 , 12 L.Ed.2d 953 (1964); United States v. Philadelphia Nat'l Bank, supra; Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, supra.

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.

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.

Pittsburgh & Conneaut Dock Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States

456 F.3d 616 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 2006

Paducah Marine Ways v. Thompson, 82 F.3d 130, 133 (6th Cir.1996); Brown v. ITT/Continental Baking Co., 921 F.2d 289 , 293 (D.C.Cir.1990). … Since the Benefits Review Board is not a policymaking agency, its interpretation of the Longshore Act is not entitled to any special deference from the court. Potomac Elec. Power Co. 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.

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.

United States v. Roberto Roper

25 F.3d 1051 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 7, 1994

Brown spoke to Caradine and then to a woman at an insurance company. Brown and Roper then went to the insurance company before going to the dealership to pick up the truck. … At the dealership, Brown signed all the necessary papers while Roper paid the salesman more cash. Roper drove the Pathfinder home and Brown drove the Maxima.

William Wise Robinson v. James E. Dow and Philip M. Swatek

522 F.2d 855 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 23, 1975

Air East, Inc. v. NTSB, 512 F.2d 1227 (3rd Cir., 1975). … Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbldg. Corp., 303 U.S. 41 , 48-50, 58 S.Ct. 459 , 82 L.Ed. 638 (1938); Kesinger v. Universal Airlines, Inc., 474 F.2d 1127, 1131 (6th Cir. 1973); Oling v.