Case law

Levine v. Fry Foods, Inc.

596 F.2d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 1979

P 11,386 Bernard LEVINE, Regional Director for Region 8 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, et al., Petitioners-Appellees Cross-Appellant, v. … By its own terms, the § 10(j) injunction expired upon "the final disposition of the matters involved before the National Labor Relations Board."

Arnold v. Wilder

657 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 2011

LMPD Sergeant Amy Brown (Brown), the highest-ranking police officer on the scene, observed Wilder standing by his police car. … See Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Justin Combs Publ’g, 507 F.3d 470, 486 (6th Cir. 2007); Boerner v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co., 394 F.3d 594, 594 (8th Cir. 2005).

United States v. Timothy Jonathan Boroski

412 F.2d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 25, 1969

In Estep v. … The question of jurisdiction of the local board is reached only if there is no basis in fact for the classification which it gave the registrant.” In Dickinson v.

Estes Bartley v. L & M Coal Co., Old Republic Companies, and Director, Owcp

901 F.2d 1311 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 23, 1990

Specifically, the Board found that the ALJ’s findings under 20 C.F.R. § 727.203 (b)(2) complied with this court’s opinion in York v. Benefits Review Board, 819 F.2d 134 (6th Cir.1987), and Neace v. … Because “ ‘a Board order that remands a case to an ALJ for further findings’ is not reviewable” as a final order, Redden v.

Routzahn v. Tyroler

36 F.2d 208 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 13, 1929

Hurwitz v. North, 271 U. S. 40, 41 , 46 S. Ct. 384 , 70 L. Ed. 818 . … That need not be a fatal objection to the theory we are adopting, for the statute does not expressly give to the fact findings of the Board this effect — which is found only by inference [see Collin v. Commissioner [C.

Andrews v. Drake

83 F.2d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 8, 1936

It is not primarily a contest between rival boards of directors. The court undoubtedly had jurisdiction (Mayer v. … Co. et al. v. Boggiano, 202 Ill. 312 , 67 N.E. 17 ; Hall v. Woods, 325 Ill. 114, 136 , 156 N.E. 258 ; Nathan v. Tompkins, 82 Ala. 437, 447 , 2 So. 747 .

United States v. Earl Coplon

339 F.2d 192 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 10, 1964

Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, 378 U.S. 52, 79 , 84 S.Ct. 1594 , 12 L.Ed.2d 678 ; Brown v. United States, 359 U.S. 41 , 79 S.Ct. 539 , 3 L.Ed.2d 609 ; United States v. Harris, 334 F.2d 460 (C.A. 2); United States v. … v.

Paula Noyes v. Channel Products, Inc.

935 F.2d 806 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 1991

See Yates v. … Compare Cooper v.

Kaufman v. United States

163 F.2d 404 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 14, 1947

National Labor Relations Board v. T. W. Phillips Gas & Oil Co., 3 Cir., 141 F.2d 304, 306 . … Hagner v. United States, 285 U.S. 427 , 52 S.Ct. 417 , 76 L.Ed. 861 ; Bozel v. United States, 6 Cir., 139 F.2d 153 .

Cyborowski v. Kinsman Transit Co.

179 F. 440 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 1910

Moit v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 153 Fed. 356 , 82 C. C. A. 430 (decided by this court), Omaha Packing Co. v. Sanduski, 155 Fed. 899 , 84 C. C. A. 89 , 19 L. R. A. (N. S.) 355. And so in Carnegie Steel Co. v. … Co. v. Barrett, 166 U. S. 617 , 17 Sup. Ct. 707, 41 L. Ed. 1136 ; Patton v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co., 179 U. S. 658 , 21 Sup. Ct. 275, 45 L. Ed. 361 ; Illinois Cent. Railroad Co. v. Coughlin, 132 Fed. 801 , 65 C. C.

National Labor Relations Board v. Millwrights Local 1102, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Afl-Cio

779 F.2d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 23, 1985

In NLRB v. … .”); NLRB v.

United States v. James M. Allen, Leonard Ray Blanton, Clyde Edward Hood, Jr.

703 F.2d 981 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 7, 1983

703 F.2d 981 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James M. ALLEN, Leonard Ray Blanton, Clyde Edward Hood, Jr., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 81-5643 to 81-5645. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. … Div., at Nashville; Bailey Brown, Chief Judge. 1 John S. McLellan, John S. McLellan, III, Kingsport, Tenn., Neal P. Rutledge, Washington, D.C., William R. Willis, Jr., Robert L. Delaney, Alfred Knight, Tyree B.

Ali Pineda v. Hamilton Cty., Ohio

977 F.3d 483 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 2, 2020

See Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250, 259–63 (2006); Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Bryan Cnty. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 404 (1997). … App’x at 416; Binay, 601 F.3d at 650; see also Bard v. Brown County, 970 F.3d 738, 755–56, 756 n.10 (6th Cir. 2020).

McLiechey v. Bristol West Insurance

474 F.3d 897 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 30, 2007

BROWN & ASSOC., Jefferson City, Missiouri, for Appellant. Lori McAllister, DYKEMA GOSSETT, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Jay Angoff, ROGER G. BROWN & ASSOC., Jefferson City, Missiouri, Thomas V. … Section 4(1)(a) of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act makes clear that the statute does not apply to “transaction[s] or conduct specifically authorized under laws administered by a regulatory board or officer acting under

James E. Brown v. Federal Correctional Institution

798 F.2d 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 1986

BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 86-5297. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. June 2, 1986. Before JONES, CONTIE and MILBURN, Circuit Judges. … Rule 4(a)(4); Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56 (1982).

McKinley Brown v. Judge Edgar P. Calhoun

798 F.2d 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 13, 1986

McKinley BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Judge Edgar P. CALHOUN, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 85-5716. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. June 13, 1986. Before MARTIN, KRUPANSKY and GUY, Circuit Judges. … Wilson v. Garcia, 105 S.Ct. 1983 (1983); Harrison v. Wright, 457 F.2d 793 (6th Cir.1972); Mulligan v. Schlachter, 389 F.2d 231 (6th Cir.1968).

Smith v. JEFFERSON COUNTY BD. OF SCHOOL

641 F.3d 197 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 2011

Similarly, in Steele v. Industrial Development Board, No. 93-5350, 1994 WL 599458, at *1 (6th Cir. … In Doremus v. Board of Education, 342 U.S. 429 (1952), the Court clarified the other side of the No. 06-6533 Smith et al. v.

In Re Subpoena Served Upon Jorge S. Zuniga, M.D. In Re Subpoena Served Upon Gary R. Pierce, M.D.

714 F.2d 632 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 3, 1983

Layton, 90 F.R.D. 520 (N.D.Cal. 1981) (privilege did not exist at common law and therefore not at federal law); United States v. Brown, 479 F.Supp. 1247 (D.Md.1979) (no general federal privilege); Flora v. … See generally, Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 , 96 S.Ct. 2831 , 49 L.Ed.2d 788 (1972); Lora v. Board of Ed. of New York, supra at 569. 9 . Compare, J.P. v.

Daniel Francei Gumbol v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

815 F.2d 406 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 2, 1987

See Cardoza-Fonseca v. … See also Farzad v. INS, 802 F.2d 123, 125 (5th Cir.1986). FIRMED. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals is AF- 1 . Compare Sankar v. INS, 757 F.2d 532 (3rd.

Bauer Bros. Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

46 F.2d 874 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 9, 1931

Indeed, that seems to be the view taken of the very language of this section by the Supreme Court of the United States in Lucas, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Ox Fibre Brush Co., 281 U. S. 115 , 50 S. … In United States v. Anderson, 269 U. S. 422 , 46 S. Ct. 131, 134 , 70 L. Ed. 347 , the .