Case law

Miller v. Oregon Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

642 F.3d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 18, 2011

See Himes v. Thompson, 336 F.3d 848, 852-53 (9th Cir. 2003). 916 MILLER v. OREGON BOARD OF PAROLE A. … MILLER v. OREGON BOARD OF PAROLE 919 B.

National Labor Relations Board v. Sonoma Vineyards, Inc.

727 F.2d 860 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 1984

The Board has broad discretion in conducting and supervising representation elections. Summa Corp. v. NLRB, 625 F.2d 293, 295 (9th Cir.1980); Coronet-Western v. NLRB, 518 F.2d 31, 32 (9th Cir.1975) (per curiam). … See NLRB v. Allen’s IGA Foodliner, 652 F.2d 594, 595-96 (6th Cir.1980) (Board agent’s comment that “if the employees had been treated right she would not be there holding the election”); NLRB v.

Anderson v. United States

205 F.2d 326 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 27, 1953

Dodge v. Board of Education, 302 U.S. 74 , 58 S.Ct. 98 , 82 L.Ed. 57 ; In re Goodwin, 6 Cir., 57 F.2d 31 . … See also Williams v.

Kasey Hoffmann v. L. Pulido

928 F.3d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 8, 2019

Pasadena v. … HOFFMANN V.

Edward H. Spraic v. United States Railroad Retirement Board

735 F.2d 1208 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 26, 1984

Two other circuits, the District of Columbia Circuit and the Seventh Circuit, have upheld the Board’s interpretation of the statute against similar challenges. Givens v. … United States Railroad Retirement Board, 720 F.2d 196 (D.C.Cir.1983), petition for cert. filed, 52 U.S.L.W. 3722 (U.S. Mar. 16, 1984); Frock v.

Gorlick Distribution Centers, LLC v. Car Sound Exhaust System, Inc.

723 F.3d 1019 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 19, 2013

Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962). … V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36, 52 , 97 S.Ct. 2549 , 53 L.Ed.2d 568 n.19 (1977).

Valley Hospital Medical Center, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 6, 2024

V. … V.

Glenn Tibble v. Edison International

711 F.3d 1061 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 2013

Brown v. Am. Life Holdings, Inc., 190 F.3d 856, 859 (8th Cir. 1999). For example, in Waller v. … Third, we observe that applying deference across the board, “by permitting an employer to grant primary interpretive authority over an ERISA plan to the plan administrator,” has the added virtue of “preserv[ing] the ‘careful

Jose Torres-Valdivias v. Loretta E. Lynch

786 F.3d 1147 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 8, 2015

TORRES-VALDIVIAS V. … TORRES-VALDIVIAS V.

National Labor Relations Board v. California Horse Racing Board, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 1501

940 F.2d 536 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 6, 1991

final Board orders. 29 U.S.C. § 160 (e) and (f); AFL v. … See also Florida Board of Business Regulation v.

Cal Coburn Brown v. John Lambert, Superintendent of Washington State Penitentiary

451 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 19, 2006

For a more detailed discussion of the facts, see the Washington Supreme Court's opinion in Brown's direct appeal, State v. Brown, 132 Wash.2d 529 , 940 P.2d 546, 555-59 (1997) (en banc). . … We find no constitutional infirmity with Brown’s conviction. See Bumper v.

Steve Lee Lewis v. Harold J. Cardwell, Superintendent, Arizona State Prison

609 F.2d 926 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 2, 1980

In Wainwright v. … Bradford v. Stone, 9 Cir., 594 F.2d 1294 ,1296 n.l, (citing Cockrell v. Oberhauser, 413 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1969); Fowle v. United States, 410 F.2d 48 (9th Cir. 1969)).

Cannery Warehousemen, Food Processors, Drivers and Helpers for Teamsters Local Union 748 v. Haig Berberian, Inc., a Delaware Corporation

623 F.2d 77 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 30, 1980

In Boire v. … Both the Teamsters and the Company agree that Board deferral to arbitration decisions involves discretion. See Douglas Aircraft Co. v. NLRB, 609 F.2d 352 (9th Cir. 1979); Local 1327,1AMAW v.

United States v. Roston

26 F. App'x 677 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 2, 2002

See Wildman v. Johnson, 261 F.3d 832, 840 (9th Cir.2001). … See United States v. Warren, 984 F.2d 325, 327 (9th Cir.1993).

State of Oregon v. Bowen

854 F.2d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 18, 1988

Ass'n v. Board of Governors, 468 U.S. 137, 143 , 104 S.Ct. 2979, 2982 , 82 L.Ed.2d 107 (1984) (quoting Federal Election Comm'n v. … See also Dunlop v.

Philippe Bernard Izsak v. Maurice H. Sigler, Chairman, United States Parole Commission, United States Bureau of Prisons

604 F.2d 1205 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 10, 1979

Andrino v. United States Board of Parole, 550 F.2d 519 (9th Cir. 1977). A collateral attack on the sentence imposed brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 will not lie. United States v. … “This explanation came too late to serve the purpose of the Board’s own regulations.” Id. at 331 .

KRISTIN PERRY v. EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 7, 2012

Proponents’ reliance on Crawford v. Board of Educa- tion, 458 U.S. 527 (1982), is therefore misplaced. … PERRY v. BROWN 1645 N.R.

United States v. Brown

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 17, 2009

Brown contends that her  UNITED STATES v. … Brown points to no evidence to the contrary. Brown nonetheless relies on United States v.

Jensen v. Brown

131 F.4th 677 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 2025

In June of 2019, the Board of Regents for the NSHE adopted a new “co-requisite policy.” … Parks v. Watson, 716 F.2d 646, 656-57 (9th  JENSEN V. BROWN 39 Cir. 1983) (quoting Bd. of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 (1972)); see also Goodisman v.

Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp. v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, U.S. Department of Labor

914 F.2d 1317 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 8, 1990

We review Board decisions “for errors of law and for adherence to the statutory standard governing the Board’s review of the [AU’s] factual determinations.” Bumble Bee Seafoods v. … Statutory direction requires the Board to review the AU’s findings for “substantial evidence.” 33 U.S.C. § 921 (b)(3); Todd Shipyards Corp. v.