Case law

United States v. Perkins, Derrin A.

138 F.3d 421 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 20, 1998

In addition, Sparrow's proffer asserted that Hartwell had signed his recantation "under duress" from appellant Board. … v.

Dock Builders, Shorers, House Movers, Pile Drivers & Foundation Workers, Local Union No. 1456 v. National Labor Relations Board

505 F.2d 310 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 31, 1974

PER CURIAM: This is a petition to review a decision and order of the National Labor Relations Board in an unfair labor practice proceeding in which the Board found that the Dock Builders Union 1 was in violation of §§ 8(b … The Board’s cross-petition for enforcement of its order will be granted. So ordered. .

Miami Free Zone Corporation, Inc. v. Foreign Trade Zones Board, United States Department of Commerce, United States of America

22 F.3d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 15, 1994

Trademarks v. United States, 790 F.2d 903, 906 (D.C.Cir.1986), aff'd in part sub nom. K Mart Corp. v. … See Traynor v. Turnage, 485 U.S. 535, 542 , 108 S.Ct. 1372, 1378 , 99 L.Ed.2d 618 (1988) (citing Bowen v.

Wendy Wagner v. Federal Election Commission

793 F.3d 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 7, 2015

Brown, at least, has already done so. See Brown Supp. Mootness Decl. ¶ 3. Accordingly, Wagner’s and Brown’s claims are moot. See, e.g., Arizonans for Official English v. … (quoting Brown v. Entm’t Merchants Ass’n, 131 S. Ct. 2729, 2740 (2011)).

Family Service Agency San Francisco v. National Labor Relations Board, Service Employees International Union, Local 790, Afl-Cio, Intervenor

163 F.3d 1369 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 15, 1999

The hearing officer, and the Board in turn, adopted this conclusion. Desert Palace, Inc. v. … The Board’s rejection of these objections was not raised here. 2 .Certification by the Board is not an "order” subject to judicial review, see American Fed’n of Labor v.

Marc Feldman v. William C. Gardner Edward J. Hickey, Jr. v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals

661 F.2d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 28, 1981

Although this doctrine originated much earlier, 68 its principal exposition came in Parker v. Brown, 69 decided in 1943. … These cases thus differ from Brown v.

Howard v. Bradshaw and Ona Bradshaw v. United States of America, Howard v. Bradshaw and Ona Bradshaw v. United States

443 F.2d 759 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 11, 1971

See United States v. Brown, 348 U.S. 110 , 75 S.Ct. 141 , 99 L.Ed. 139 (1954); Hale v. United States, 416 F.2d 355 (6th Cir. 1969); United States v. … See Cobia v. United States, 384 F.2d 711 (10th Cir. 1967); United States v. Browning, 359 F.2d 937 (10th Cir. 1966); Wolff v. Britton, 117 U.S.App.D.C. 209 , 328 F.2d 181 (1964).

International Woodworkers of America, Afl-Cio, Local 3-10 v. National Labor Relations Board, Long Lake Lumber Company, Intervenor

458 F.2d 852 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 18, 1972

Fruit & Vegetable Packers and Warehousemen, Local 760 v. NLRB, 114 U.S.App.D.C. 388, 389-390 , 316 F.2d 389 , 390-391 (1963); and see Retail Clerks Union No. 1550 v. … Union, Local 4-243 v. NLRB, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 116 , 362 F.2d 943, 946 (1966).

Utility Workers Union of America, Local 246, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Southern California Edison Company, Intervenor

39 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 18, 1994

See IRS v. … Workers v.

Hamilton v. Dunn

46 App. D.C. 157 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 19, 1917

While we agree with the Examiners in Chief and the Assistant Commissioner that in no event, under the facts of this case, can it be said that Hamilton is the prior inventor (Matthes v. Burt, 24 App. D. C. 265; Brown v. … C. 499; and Dutcher v. Jackson, 44 App. D.

William D. Lovell v. Walter N. Tobriner, Individual Members of the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia

310 F.2d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 29, 1962

The order of the Retirement Board was affirmed by the District of Columbia Commissioners. … The memorandum opinion of the District Judge states that the reason the Board had not retired appellant under D.C.Code § 4-527 (1961), was that “the Board was not satisfied with the proof that the 1948 injury had actually

Robey v. Schwab

307 F.2d 198 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1962

In Saginaw Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Com. … Prusik v. Board of Appeal of Building Department, 262 Mass. 451, 457 , 160 N.E. 312 (1928); Gaunt et al. v. Board of Appeals of Methuen, 327 Mass. 380 , 99 N.E.2d 61 (Sup.Ct.Mass.1951). .

Joseph Sheble, III v. Michael Huerta

755 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 2014

SHEBLE, III, PETITIONER v. MICHAEL P. … Sheble alleges that Brown’s fiancé had, at some point in the 2000s, told Sheble that he was running a “ticket mill” and that Brown later used the same phrase during Sheble’s SEED evaluation.

Local No. 433, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Afl--Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

509 F.2d 447 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 22, 1974

The Carpenters Union filed the instant petition for review, and the Board cross-petitioned for enforcement of its order. *450 II. INTERPRETATIONS OF SECTION 8(b)(4)(B) In NLRB v. … Ass’n v. NLRB, 354 F.2d 594 (7th Cir. 1965) ; United Bhd. of Carpenters and Joiners v. NLRB, 339 F.2d 142 (6th Cir. 1964) ; NLRB v. Longshoremen’s Local 1694, 331 F.2d 712 (3rd Cir. 1964) ; NLRB v.

Grain Elevator, Flour and Feed Mill Workers, International Longshoremen Association, Local 418, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

376 F.2d 774 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 31, 1967

Madden v. Grain Elevator, etc., Local 418, supra note 2 at 1019. That opinion sufficiently demonstrates the inapplicability to the controversy before the Board of the Supreme Court’s decision in Incres S.S. Co. v. … Madden v. Grain Elevator, etc., Local 418, supra note 2, 334 F.2d at 1020 . This was not the basis of the Board’s decision, and hence is not before us. 8 .

United Electrical, Radio and MacHine Workers of America v. National Labor Relations Board, Star Expansion Industries Corp., Intervenor

409 F.2d 150 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 11, 1969

NLRB v. … NLRB v.

Georgia-Pacific Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, Local Union No. 7, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Intervenor

892 F.2d 130 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 29, 1989

We held in ILWU v. … final settlement of jurisdictional disputes once the Board’s authority has been properly invoked, see NLRB v.

Mortgage Bankers Association v. Seth Harris

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 2, 2013

Opinion for the Court by Circuit Judge BROWN. BROWN, Circuit Judge: The tandem of Paralyzed Veterans of America v. D.C. Arena L.P., 117 F.3d 579 (D.C. Cir. 1997) and Alaska Professional Hunters Ass’n v. … Warshauer v. Solis, 577 F.3d 1330, 1338 (11th Cir. 2009); see also United States v.

Retail Clerks International Association, Afl-Cio, and Retail Clerks International Association, Local 880, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

366 F.2d 642 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 27, 1966

But it argues that the only case in which this Board policy has been reviewed by a court, International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union v. … The Board cites two cases for this proposition, International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union v.

Jackson v. Clifford

5 App. D.C. 312 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 5, 1895

Y. 412 ; Wiles v. Suydam, 64 N. Y. 173 ; Easterly v. Barber, 65 N. Y. 252 ; Knox v. Baldwin, 80 N. Y. 610 ; Veeder v. Baker, 83 N. Y. 156 ; Pier v. George, 86 N. Y. 613 ; Stokes v. Stickney, 96 N. Y. 323 . … Squires v. Brown, 22 How. Pr. 35 . Indeed, the right to resign seems to be well established upon authority. Bruce v. Platt, 80 N. Y. 379 ; Briggs v. Spaulding, 141 U.