Case law

Greensboro-High Point Airport Authority v. Civil Aeronautics Board

262 F.2d 689 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 26, 1958

Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Civil Aeronautics Board entered after the Board had completed proceedings undertaken as a result of our order of remand in Greensboro-High Point Airport Authority v. … We think the Board adequately complied with our order.

Paul Lindsay v. National Transportation Safety Board Federal Aviation Administration

47 F.3d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 24, 1995

The Supreme Court so held in Bogk v. … See, e.g., Alston v. Bowins, 733 F.2d 161, 163-64 (D.C.Cir.1984). We have not considered whether all of the Board’s previous decisions are consistent with this approach.

Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

300 F.2d 904 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 6, 1962

Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm., 219 U.S. 498, 515 , 31 S.Ct. 279 , 55 L.Ed. 310 . … But see American Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, supra.

John H. Vandermolen v. John C. Stetson, Secretary of the Air Force

571 F.2d 617 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 23, 1977

Mogavero v. McLucas, 543 F.2d 1081, 1085 (4th Cir. 1975); Geiger v. Brown, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 132, 135 , 419 F.2d 714, 717-19 (1969); Powell v. … United States, 40 F. 441, 442-43 (C.C.D.Mass.1889); Wolak v. United States, 366 F.Supp. 1106, 1110 (D.Conn. 1973); Brown v.

Local 13, Detroit Newspaper, Etc. v. National Labor Relations Board

598 F.2d 267 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 9, 1979

Accordingly, we pay great deference to the Board's decision; and must affirm if it is supported in the record and reasonably based in law. See San Diego Newspaper Guild v. NLRB, 548 F.2d at 867; NLRB v. … The order of the Board is therefore 25 Affirmed. 1 The opinion and order of the National Labor Relations Board (Board) is reprinted in 233 N.L.R.B.

Brewery & Beverage Drivers & Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

257 F.2d 194 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 1, 1958

We think it sufficient to say that in our view, on the facts of this case, the Board’s conclusion appears arbitrary. Cf. Packard Motor Car Co. v. … See National Labor Relations Board v. Columbian Enameling & Stamping Co., 1939, 306 U.S. 292 , 59 S.Ct. 501 , 83 L.Ed. 660 ; Zall v.

Eichberg v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp.

285 F. 928 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 4, 1922

Eichberg, trading as National Timber Company, and the United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation. … Davis v. Schwartz, 155 U. S. 631 , 15 Sup. Ct. 237, 39 L. Ed. 289 .

United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp. v. Eichberg

14 F.2d 248 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 1, 1926

United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation and the United States, and Astoria Marine Iron Works v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation et al., 258 U. S. 549 , 42 S. Ct. 386 , 66 L. … Co. v. North Dakota, 250 U. S. 135, 152 , [ 39 S. Ct. 502 , 63 L. Ed. 897 ]. The transfer of the property of the Fleet Corporation to the Shipping Board by the Act of June 5, 1920, c. 250, § 4, 41 Stat. 988 , 990 [Comp.

Verizon New York Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

360 F.3d 206 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 16, 2004

Edison Co. v. NLRB, 460 U.S. 693, 708 (1983). … Co. v.

Glaziers' Local No. 558 v. National Labor Relations Board

408 F.2d 197 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 23, 1969

United States v. L.A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., 344 U.S. 33 , 73 S.Ct. 67 , 97 L.Ed. 54 (1952) ; Gearhart & Otis, Inc. v. SEG, supra note 11 ; Democrat Printing Co. v. … United States v. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., supra note 12, at 37.

Esmail Haftlang v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

790 F.2d 140 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 9, 1986

See I&NS v. Wang, 450 U.S. 139, 141 , 101 S.Ct. 1027, 1029 , 67 L.Ed.2d 123 (1981); Brown v. I&NS, 775 F.2d 383, 387 (D.C.Cir.1985). … I&NS v. Rios-Pineda, - U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2098, 2102 , 85 L.Ed.2d 452 (1985); Brown v. I&NS, supra, 775 F.2d at 387 .

Retail Clerks Union Local 770 v. National Labor Relations Board

296 F.2d 368 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 1961

Local 1976, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. N. L. R. B., 357 U.S. 93 , 78 S.Ct. 1011 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1186 (1958). . National Labor Relations Board v. … In National Labor Relations Board v. Denver Bldg. & Const.

Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. Helvering

112 F.2d 205 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 15, 1940

It was argued in Brown & Sons Lumber Co. v. … An attempt is made to distinguish Brown & Sons Lumber Co., v.

Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International v. Civil Aeronautics Board

509 F.2d 964 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 17, 1975

CAB, No. 74-1900 (submitted on the briefs for consolidation and simultaneous decision with A.L.P.A. v. CAB, No. 73-2181, and United States v. … Such an action does not constitute official action by the Board and the Board could have changed its mind. See Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v.

Puerto Rico Steamship Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board

281 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 23, 1960

We recognize the following holding of the Supreme Court in National Labor Relations Board v. … The Board’s order will be further modified to eliminate this provision. Cf. Phelps Dodge Corp v. N. L. R. B., 1941, 313 U.S. 177 , 61 S.Ct. 845 , 85 L.Ed. 1271 ; Alberty v.

Delta Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Southern Airways, Intervenor

442 F.2d 730 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 4, 1970

The Board must consider and make a relative determination and evaluation of all pertinent factors.” Braniff Airways, Inc. v. CAB, 126 U.S.App.D.C. 399, 402 , 379 F.2d 453, 462 (1967). … Delta Airlines, Inc. v. CAB, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 46 , 51, 228 F.2d 17 , 22 (1955). See also Easton Publishing Co. v. FCC, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 33 , 175 F.2d 344 (1949); Johnston Broadcasting Co. v.

New York Rehabilitation Care Management, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board

506 F.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 30, 2007

LLC v. … “Our review of the Board’s factual conclusions is ‘highly deferential,’” Perdue Farms, Inc. v. NLRB, 144 F.3d 830, 834 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (quoting LCF, Inc. v. NLRB, 129 F.3d 1276, 1281 (D.C.

Local 1814, International Longshoremen's Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board

735 F.2d 1384 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 15, 1984

In NLRB v. … NLRB v. WTVJ, Inc., 268 F.2d 346, 348 (5th Cir. 1959) (“Even absent an exception, the Board is not compelled to act as a mere rubber stamp for its [ALJ].”); see Hedstrom Co. v.

Joshi Ex Rel. Estate of Joshi v. National Transportation Safety Board

791 F.3d 8 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 19, 2015

Graham v. … In Gibson v.

Union Pacific Railroad v. Surface Transportation Board

628 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 28, 2010

Because the Board’s decision “articulated a rational connection between the facts found and the decision made,” N. Am. Freight Car Ass’n v. STB, 529 F.3d 1166, 1170- 71 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (quoting PPL Mont., LLC v. … Co. v. STB, 609 F.3d 432, 438 (D.C. Cir. 2010); 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). Deference is particularly high in rate disputes, where “the Board acts at the zenith of its powers.” Id. (quoting Burlington N. R.R. v.