Case law

Pyramid Lake Paiute v. Board of Directors

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 22, 2013

OF NV DIV OF L, Division of Lands; STATE OF NEVADA PAROLE DEPT ., Division of Wildlife; STILLWATER FARMS INC.; THE LARRY FRITZ FAMILY TRUST ; TOWN OF FERNLEY , Defendants, and BOARD … OF DIRECTORS OF TCID (TRUCKEE IRRIGATION DISTRICT ), Defendant-Appellant. 2 UNITED STATES V .

United States v. Marvin Frederick Leazar and David Anthony Brown

460 F.2d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 9, 1972

He and De La Ossa then took Leazar and Brown to the local jail. There, Timilty briefly interrogated Brown after having given Brown the required warnings. Brown indicated only that he did not know Leazar. … Moreover, there was no evidence upon which one could reasonably conclude that Brown was, or had ever been, constructively in possession and control of the contraband. See Montoya v.

William T. Brady James Cardwell Dar-Kel Corporation v. Chester P. Brown Maria De Los Angeles Castelazo De Brown Lorna Brown De Mena

60 F.3d 832 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 30, 1995

BRADY; James Cardwell; Dar-Kel Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Chester P. BROWN; Maria De Los Angeles Castelazo De Brown; Lorna Brown De Mena, Defendants-Appellants. No. 94-56639. … See United States v.

Ivaldi v. National Labor Relations Board

48 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 1995

STANDARD OF REVIEW We uphold the decisions of the Board “if its findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and if the Board correctly applied the law.” NLRB v. … Co. v.

Olsen v. Idaho State Board of Medicine

363 F.3d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 2004

Miller v. … Passenger Corp. v.

Brown v. City of Los Angeles

107 F. App'x 708 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 23, 2004

Oviatt v. Pearce, 954 F.2d 1470 , 1474 (9th Cir.1992). … Absent a protectable property interest, Brown cannot establish a due process claim. Bateson v. Geisse, 857 F.2d 1300, 1305 (9th Cir.1988).

California State Board of Equalization v. Sampsell

196 F.2d 252 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 1952

See State Board of Equalization v. Boteler, 9 Cir., 1942, 131 F.2d 386 ; California State Board of Equalization v. Goggin, 9 Cir., 1951, 191 F.2d 726 . … Goggin, 9 Cir., 1951, 191 F.2d 726 , and State Board of Equalization v. Boteler, 9 Cir., 1942, 131 F.2d 386 .

Festus Anwuli v. Merrick Garland

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 18, 2021

Mairena v. Barr, 917 F.3d 1119, 1123 (9th Cir. 2019) (per curiam) (quoting Zumel v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 463, 471 (9th Cir. 2015)). The Board did not err in applying Frentescu. … The Board was not further required to discuss every factor that may have influenced Anwuli’s sentence. Cf. Frentescu, 18 I. & N. Dec. at 247; Villegas Sanchez v.

Ware v. Franchise Tax Board

56 F. App'x 317 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 22, 2003

MEMORANDUM ** Marty Ware appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) in his employment discrimination action. … See Bradshaw v. Zoological Society of San Diego, 662 F.2d 1301,1318 (1981). Ware’s remaining contentions lack merit. AFFIRMED.

William A. Clark v. Lauren Young Tire Center Profit Sharing Trust, Alan A. Brown, and Alan Brown Tire Center, Inc.

816 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 4, 1987

This is not a case like Frary v. … See Golden v. Kentile Floors, Inc., 512 F.2d 838, 844 (5th Cir.1975); Shandor v. Wells Nat’l Serv. Corp., 478 F.Supp. 12, 14 (N.D.Ga.1979). As applied here, moreover, Clark cannot complain.

Elimimian v. Board of Trustees

49 F. App'x 156 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 22, 2002

Monroe v. City of Phoenix, 248 F.3d 851, 858-59 (9th Cir.2001); Fed.R.Civ.P. 51. We find no error with the district court’s evidentiary rulings.

Coleman v. California Board of Prison Terms

228 F. App'x 673 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 6, 2007

Appeal No. 05-17380: Board of Prison Terms v. … United States v.

Pinetree Transportation Company v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Pinetree Transportation Company

686 F.2d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 17, 1982

Sonoco Products Co. v. NLRB, 399 F.2d 835, 839 (9th Cir. 1968); Anchor Inns, Inc. v. NLRB, supra, 644 F.2d at 296 ; NLRB v. Claxton Mfg. Co., supra, 613 F.2d at 1365 ; Methodist Home v. … For example, the Board’s reliance on such decisions as Vari-tronics Co. v. NLRB, 589 F.2d 991 (9th Cir. 1979); NLRB v. Children’s Baptist Home, 576 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1978); NLRB v. W. S.

Raley's, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

703 F.2d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 1983

The Board had no reason in the Styletek case to analyze the announcement and the conferral of benefits separately. Similarly, J.P. Stevens & Co. v. … NLRB v.

Ivaldi v. National Labor Relations Board

48 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 1995

STANDARD OF REVIEW 11 We uphold the decisions of the Board "if its findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and if the Board correctly applied the law." NLRB v. … Co. v.

Theis Research, Inc. v. Brown & Bain

83 F. App'x 232 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 16, 2003

Water Dist. v. E.F. … Ficek v.

Bergman v. National Labor Relations Board

577 F.2d 100 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 15, 1978

National Labor Relations Board v. Davis

642 F.2d 350 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 20, 1981

We hold, as well, that the Board’s inquiry into whether a fair election might be held was adequate and that the Board’s reasons are sufficiently explicit to justify the bargaining order. ANALYSIS In NLRB v. … NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Davis

642 F.2d 350 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 20, 1981

P 12,715 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. … We hold, as well, that the Board's inquiry into whether a fair election might be held was adequate and that the Board's reasons are sufficiently explicit to justify the bargaining order. ANALYSIS 10 In NLRB v.

Musquiz v. United States Railroad Retirement Board

106 F.4th 881 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 3, 2024

MUSQUIZ V. U.S. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 3 considered the second waiver element. … MUSQUIZ V. U.S. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 5 Musquiz started work at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital (“SBCH”), a non-rail industry employer.