Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry, Local No. 741

704 F.2d 1164 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 28, 1983

In N.L.R.B. v. … In Labor Board v. Radio Engineers, 364 U.S. 573 , 81 S.Ct. 330 , 5 L.Ed.2d 302 (1961), two labor unions were engaged in a jurisdictional dispute and one of them caused a work stoppage.

United States v. Gerald Thomas Brown

52 F.3d 335 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 13, 1995

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gerald Thomas BROWN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10340. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 10, 1995. * Decided April 13, 1995. … United States v. Martinez, No. 93-50803, slip op. at 2552-53 (9th Cir. Mar. 7, 1995). Therefore, Brown can be punished under both statutes without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Josephine C. Toscano AKA Josephine C. Zelasko v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

441 F.2d 930 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 28, 1971

Thus the Tax Court differs from its predecessor, the Board of Tax Appeals, which was held not to be a court and to have no equitable powers. C.I.R. v. Gooch Milling & Elev. … See also Brown, 1968, 51 T.C. 116 .

Walter David Morgan v. F.T. MacDonald White Pine County School Board R. Angelone George Deeds S. Godinez C. Wolff W. Reid

41 F.3d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 2, 1994

See Goldberg v. Whitaker House Coop., Inc., 366 U.S. 28, 33 , 81 S.Ct. 933, 936 , 6 L.Ed.2d 100 (1961). But we declined to apply the four-factor test from Bonnette v. … See, e.g., Harker v. State Use Indus., 990 F.2d 131 , 133 (4th Cir. 1993); Vanskike v. Peters, 974 F.2d 806, 809-10 (7th Cir. 1992); Miller v. Dukakis, 961 F.2d 7, 9 (1st Cir. 1992). 5 .

Cathy Neely, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Stephen Feinstein, Defendants-Appellants-Cross

50 F.3d 1502 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 3, 1995

In Redman v. … Romero v.

United States v. William Lloyd Bailey

458 F.2d 408 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 1, 1972

In applying Aguilar in Durham v. … Contrast also the affidavit upheld in United States v. Brown (9th Cir. 1972) 455 F.2d 1201 .

Morales v. Cate

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 28, 2010

The district court found that Brown’s intervention and pursuit 16748 MORALES v. CATE of his claims in the Morales litigation is timely. Sept. 24 Order at 6-7. 8. … Between the time of the district court’s rulings in Morales and Brown’s intervention in the case, the Supreme Court decided Baze v.

Tapps Brewing Inc v. City of Sumner

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2008

First, relying on Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington, 538 U.S. 216 (2003), the McClungs argue that the require-  TAPPS BREWING v. … Rather, it provides an across-the-board requirement for all new developments.

Arvil M. Ashley v. United States

413 F.2d 490 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 7, 1969

Mann v. United States, 399 F.2d 672 (9th Cir. 1968). The limitation period is not tolled during the time of a claimant’s minority. Brown v. United States, 353 F.2d 578 (9th Cir. 1065); Pittman v. … Hungerford v. United States, 307 F.2d 99, 102 (9th Cir. 1962); see also Brown v. United States, supra; Quinton v. United States, 304 F.2d 234 (5th Cir. 1962). This principle does not benefit Ashley.

National Labor Relations Board v. Carson Cable Tv Inglewood Cable Tv Tci of Pomona Cable Tv and Cable Management Company

795 F.2d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 1986

In conducting our review, “in light of the special expertise of the Board, we will defer to the reasonable derivative inferences drawn by the Board from credited evidence.” See NLRB v. … Accordingly, the Board’s decision “will rarely be disturbed on appeal.” Alaska Statebank, 653 F.2d at 1287 . In NLRB v.

Mosley v. Los Angeles Unified School District

36 F. App'x 912 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 29, 2002

Barnett v. Centoni 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir.1994) (per cu-riam). We affirm. … See EEOC v. Farmer Bros. Co., 31 F.3d 891, 899 (9th Cir.1994). The district court acted within its discretion by denying Mosley’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions. See New Alaska Dev. Corp. v.

Lang v. Long-Term Disability Plan of Sponsor Applied Remote Technology, Inc.

125 F.3d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 11, 1997

See Firestone, 489 U.S. at 115 , 109 S.Ct. at 956-57 (courts must weigh conflict as a “factor” in determining whether abuse of discretion has occurred); Brown v. … See Brown, 898 F.2d at 1567 .

Environmental Defense Center, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

319 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 14, 2003

See South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203, 211 , 107 S.Ct. 2793 , 97 L.Ed.2d 171 (1987); New York, 505 U.S. at 176-77 , 112 S.Ct. 2408 ; Hodel, 452 U.S. at 288 , 101 S.Ct. 2352 ; Board of Natural Resources v. … In NRDC v.

41 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 36,458, 7 Employee Benefits Ca 1953 Retired Public Employees' Association of California Chapter 22 Oakland Retired Employees' Association and Mrs. Winofred White v. State of California State Personnel Board of the State of California Board of Administration of the Public Employees Retirement System Retirement Board City of Oakland, Retired Employees' Association of California, Chapter 22 Oakland Retired Employees' Association and Mrs. Winofred White v. State of California State Personnel Board of the State of California and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, Jacob B. Gunn, on Behalf of Himself and All Persons Similarly Situated v. State of California State Personnel Board of the State of California and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System

799 F.2d 511 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 9, 1986

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; State Personnel Board of the State of California; Board of Administration of the Public Employees Retirement System; Retirement Board City of Oakland, Defendants-Appellants. … Winofred White, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA; State Personnel Board of the State of California; and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, Defendants-Appellants. Jacob B.

Jehan Mir v. Medical Board of California

552 F. App'x 723 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 17, 2014

No. 3:12-cv-02340-GPC- DHB v. MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA; MEMORANDUM* et al., Defendants - Appellees. … Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008) (listing factors for district court to consider); Sports Form, Inc. v.

James Davison v. Pacific Inland Navigation Company, Inc., a Washington Corporation, and Mitsubishi International Corporation, a New York Corporation

569 F.2d 507 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 13, 1978

See Brown v. Mitsubishi Shintaku Ginko, 550 F.2d 331 (5th Cir. 1977); Gay v. Ocean Transp. & Trading, Ltd., 546 F.2d 1233 (5th Cir. 1977); Napoli v. Hellenic Lines, Ltd., 536 F.2d 505 (2d Cir. 1976). … See Hurst, supra at 1249 n.35; Brown v. Ivarans Rederi A/S, 545 F.2d 854 , 863 n.10 (3d Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 969 , 97 S.Ct. 1652 , 52 L.Ed.2d 361 (1977).

Estate of Kevin Brown v. Michael Lambert

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 24, 2019

No. to the Estate of Kevin Brown, 3:15-cv-01583-DMS-WVG Plaintiffs-Appellees, MEMORANDUM* v. MICHAEL LAMBERT, an individual; MAURA J. … United States v.

Morales v. Cate

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 27, 2010

v. … Between the time of the district court’s rulings in Morales and Brown’s intervention in the case, the Supreme Court decided Baze v.

Juan Devora-Rojas v. Jefferson Sessions

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 29, 2018

Juan Andres Devora-Rojas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA" or "the Board") order denying * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and … See Martinez-Serrano v.

Leslie J. Grisham v. Philip Morris U.S.A., a Corporation Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company Corp., Individually and as Successor to the American Tobacco Company and Its Predecessor in Interest, British American Tobacco Industries, Plc, Maria Cannata v. Philip Morris Usa, Inc., AKA Philip Morris Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation

403 F.3d 631 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 29, 2005

Maria Cannata, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., aka Philip Morris; Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. 03-55780. No. 03-56018. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. … V.