Case law

Michael Angelo Fifer v. Officer D. Chambers, Warden John Jabe, and Robert Brown, Jr.

840 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 1988

Michael Angelo FIFER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer D. CHAMBERS, Warden John Jabe, and Robert Brown, Jr., Defendants-Appellees. No. 87-1794. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Feb. 16, 1988.

National Labor Relations Board v. Eppa Industries, Inc.

103 F.3d 130 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 1996

Before: ENGEL, BROWN, and COLE, Circuit Judges. … Board); NLRB v.

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Tuttle

89 F.2d 112 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 1937

We conclude that Douglas v. Will-cuts does not reach the present case, and that the Board of Tax Appeals’ decision *116 was right. … The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed.

Grand Trunk Western Ry. Co. v. Heatlie

48 F.2d 759 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 15, 1931

Co. v. Lambert (C. C. A.) 150 F. 555 ; Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. O’Neill (C. C. A.) 186 F. 13 . … Begert v. Payne, 274 P. 784 ( 6 C. C. A.).

Third Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. United States

53 F.2d 599 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 11, 1931

We also assume that the board so acting bases its decision upon facts disclosed in the official reports in the files of the bureau. … Soc. v. Stinnett, 13 F.(2d) 820 (6 C. C. A.). There is nothing in McInerney v. United States (C. C. A.) 143 F. 729 , and Evanston v. Gunn, 99 U. S. 660 , 25 L. Ed. 306 , which conflicts with this view. McGovern v.

Ford v. Nicks

741 F.2d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 20, 1984

Ford, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Chancellor Roy S. NICKS, individually and in his official capacity as Chief Executive Officer, State of Tennessee Board of Regents; Governor Ray Blanton; C.C. … Bond; Wayne Brown; Sam Ingram; Kenneth Ezell; Edward S. Porter; Dale Glover; James H. Jones, Jr.; Charles J. Liner; Johnella H. Martin; Ella V. Ross; J. Frank Taylor; J.

Michael v. Ghee

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 10, 2007

Although Swihart’s due process challenge to the procedures used by the parole board is cognizable under § 1983 pursuant to Wilkinson v. … Prior to 1987, no guidelines were issued to guide the parole board’s discretion in making sentencing determinations. In 1987, the parole board adopted guidelines to assist it in exercising its discretion. See State v.

Robert I. Ward and Ruth Ward, Cross-Appellees v. United States of America, Cross-Appellant

838 F.2d 182 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 1988

BAILEY BROWN, Senior Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs Robert I. … See Dawsey v.

Louisville Cooperage Co. v. Commissioner

47 F.2d 599 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 13, 1931

He was prima facie right and the taxpayer carried the burden of convincing the Board of Tax Appeals to the contrary. Botany Worsted Mills v. U. S., 278 U,. S. 282, 290, 49 S. Ct. 129 , 73 L. Ed. 379 ; Wickwire v. … Ed. 184 ; Austin Co. v. Com’r, 35 F.(2d) 910, 912 (C. C. A. 6). See also Lucas v. Kansas City Structural Steel Co., 281 U. S. 264, 271 , 50 S. Ct. 263 , 74 L. Ed. 848 .

National Labor Relations Board v. Detroit Painting Corp.

70 F.3d 1272 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 20, 1995

Likewise, it has not filed a response to the Board's application to this court. Under these circumstances, we conclude the Board is entitled to the relief sought. See NLRB v. … Board); NLRB v.

64 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1611, 64 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 43,018 the Vanguards of Cleveland v. The City of Cleveland, Local Union No. 93, I.A.F.F., Afl-Cio, Intervenor-Appellant

23 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 6, 1994

(citing Board of Educ. v. … See also Brown v.

Gibbs v. Bolden

84 F. App'x 587 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 2003

See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 739-41 , 121 S.Ct. 1819 , 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001); Brown v. Toombs, 139 F.3d 1102,1104 (6th Cir.1998). … See Baxter v. Rose, 305 F.3d 486, 488 (6th Cir.2002); Brown, 139 F.3d at 1104 .

Troy Wagon Works Co. v. Ohio Trailer Co.

274 F. 612 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 27, 1921

Heald v. Rice, 104 U. S. 737 -755, 26 L. Ed. 910 ; Huebner-Toledo Breweries Co. v. Mathews, 253 Fed. 435 -447, 165 C. C. A. 177 ; Turner v. Lauter Piano Co., 248 Fed. 930 , 161 C. C. A. 48 ; Robinson v. Fabric Co. (D. … C.) 248 bed. 526; Overweight Counter-balance Elevator Co. v. Machine Co., 102 Fed. 957 , 43 C. C. A. 80 ; Self Sealing Can Co. v. Hocker (C. C.) 136 Fed. 418 ; Warren Webster & Co. v. Dunham, 181 Fed. 836 , 104 C. C.

Wayne Boich v. Federal Mine Safety And Health Review Commission

704 F.2d 275 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 5, 1983

The Pasula test is derived from Mount Healthy Board of Education v. … The court found substantial evidence to support the Board's conclusion that an employer violated the NLRA under either test in NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. W.F. Bolin Company

99 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 25, 1996

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. W.F. BOLIN COMPANY, Respondent. No. 95-6548. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Oct. 25, 1996. NLRB, Nos. 9-CA-29404 9-CA-29448. NLRB, 1993 WL 243862 . … In a published opinion, we held that the Board's decision and order was supported by substantial evidence and denied the petition for review. W.F. Bolin Co. v.

James G. Jackson v. City of Columbus, Gregory Lashutka, Thomas W. Rice, Sr.

194 F.3d 737 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 17, 1999

Pickering v. Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, 568, 88 . S.Ct. 1731, 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968). … In support of this claim, he cites Cleveland Board of Education v.

Taft v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

92 F.2d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 2, 1937

, to review the order of the Board. … The order of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed.

Max Dean v. Richard Austin

602 F.2d 121 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 1979

See Illinois State Board of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173 , 99 S.Ct. 983 , 59 L.Ed.2d 230 (1979). … In Illinois State Board of Elections, supra, the Supreme Court stated the test for the exception as follows: ■ In Weinstein v.

Hendry Sanusi v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

474 F.3d 341 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 2007

“In considering a petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, we review the Board’s legal determinations de novo ... and its factual findings under the substantial evidence standard[.] … The substantial evidence standard requires us to uphold the Board’s findings as long as they are ‘supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.’ ” Mostafa v.

Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Company, Ltd.

83 F.3d 127 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 29, 1996

Before: MERRITT, Chief Judge; BROWN and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. 1 The underlying facts of these cases are quite notorious. … In Klaxon Co. v.