Case law

In re Fritts

45 App. D.C. 211 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 1, 1916

Kendall v. Winsor, 21 How. 322, 328 , 16 L. ed. 165, 167. Other forms of monopoly are denounced by the law, and this form is protected for a given period of time for the public good. Brown v. Campbell, 41 App. D. … In Kendall v.

Napleton 1050, Inc. v. NLRB

976 F.3d 30 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 6, 2020

We review the Board’s procedural rulings for abuse of discretion. See Salem Hosp. Corp. v. NLRB, 808 F.3d 59, 67 (D.C. Cir. 2015); see also Veritas Health Servs., Inc. v. NLRB, 895 F.3d 69, 87 (D.C. … See, e.g., Goldtex, Inc. v.

Local No. 742, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, John Foreman, Business Agent, and Harold Stolley, Steward v. National Labor Relations Board, J. L. Simmons Company, Inc., Intervenor. J. L. Simmons Company, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

444 F.2d 895 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 6, 1971

444 F.2d 895 LOCAL NO. 742, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, John Foreman, Business Agent, and Harold Stolley, Steward, Petitioners, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, J. L. … See Meat & Highway Drivers, Local 710 v. NLRB, 118 U.S. App.D.C. 287, 335 F.2d 709 (1964); Truck Drivers Union Local No. 413 v.

Sidney J. Brown v. Resolution Trust Corporation

106 F.3d 442 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 4, 1997

See Brown v. RTC, No. 93-2597, slip op. at 8-9 (4th Cir. … Complaint at 25 (Brown v. RTC, C.A. No. 93-1450-A (E.D.Va.))

Olen (Allen) Lee v. Nathan Habib, Olen Lee v. Nathan Habib

424 F.2d 891 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 22, 1970

Brown v. Plant, D.C.Mun.App., 157 A.2d 289, 291 (1960). 17 . As this court said in Holmes v. … Lane v. Brown, supra Note 35. 47 . Gardner v. California, supra Note 37. 48 . 383 U.S. 663 , 86 S.Ct. 1079 , 16 L.Ed.2d 169 (1966). 49 .

Dufur v. U.S. Parole Comm'n

314 F. Supp. 3d 10 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 24, 2018

Browning v. Clinton , 292 F.3d 235 , 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … In a later decision, Board of Pardons v.

Communications Workers of America v. NLRB

6 F.4th 15 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 23, 2021

Guard Publ’g Co. v. NLRB, 571 F.3d 53 (D.C. Cir. 2009). … Van Buren v. United States, 141 S.

N. V. Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken v. Atomic Energy Commission

316 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 21, 1963

Brown, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Ellsworth C. Alvord, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioners. Mr. Edward A. … V.

The News Union of Baltimore v. National Labor Relations Board, Hearst Corp., News American Division, Intervenor. Truck Drivers and Helpers, Local 355, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers v. National Labor Relations Board, Hearst Corp., News American Division, Intervenor

393 F.2d 673 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 9, 1968

393 F.2d 673 The NEWS UNION OF BALTIMORE, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. Hearst Corp., News American Division, Intervenor. … NLRB v.

William B. Ogden v. Eugene M. Zuckert, Secretary of the Air Force

298 F.2d 312 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 14, 1961

The Secretary relies on our cases of Bolger v. Marshall, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 30 , 193 F.2d 37 , and Young v. Higley, 95 U.S.App.D.C. 122 , 220 F.2d 487 , and on the Second Circuit case of Michaelson v. … And in Levers v.

Chambers v. Robertson

183 F.2d 144 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1950

Therefore, any court intervention, to be effective, must be before a decision by the Board or, at least, must be initiated before such decision (compare Aircraft & Diesel Corp. v. … Nor is this a case where final decision, if it is to be effective, should be deferred until after the decision of the Board (Cf. Aircraft & Diesel Equipment Corp. v.

NLRB v. NP Palace LLC

1 F.4th 12 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 8, 2021

, PETITIONER v. … That is where the Board comes in. Here, the Board used its “broad discretion[]” to craft a remedy that protects confidential information. Fibreboard Paper Prods. Corp. v. NLRB, 379 U.S. 203, 216 (1964).

Air Transport Association Of America, Petitioner v. Department Of Transportation

900 F.2d 369 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 27, 1990

Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281, 316 , 99 S.Ct. 1705, 1725 , 60 L.Ed.2d 208 (1979). … Brown, 441 U.S. at 316 , 99 S.Ct. at 1725 .

Kornitzky Grp., LLC v. Elwell

912 F.3d 637 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 9, 2019

See Order, Wilson v. Cox, No. 12-5070 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 16, 2013); Order, Am. Tort Reform Ass'n v. OSHA , No. 12-1229 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 9, 2013); Order, Janko v. Gates, No. 12-5017 (D.C. Cir. … Oct. 9, 2013); Order, Mittleman v. Postal Regulatory Comm'n, No. 12-1095 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 9, 2013); Order, Roane v. Leonhart, No. 12-5020 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 9, 2013); Order, United States v.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Monfort of Colorado, Inc., Intervenor. National Labor Relations Board v. Monfort of Colorado, Inc., United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Afl-Cio, Intervenor

852 F.2d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 12, 1988

P 10,648 UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, Monfort of Colorado, Inc., Intervenor. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner v. … Conair Corporation v. N.L.R.B., 721 F.2d 1355, 1386 (D.C.Cir.1983). 3 We enforce the Board's order as entered by it. I.

Chappell-Johnson v. Powell

440 F.3d 484 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 17, 2006

Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C. Cir. 1999). To be sure, as the FDIC points out, we explained in Teneyck v. Omni Shoreham Hotel, 365 F.3d 1139,  7 1150 (D.C. … Brown, 199 F.3d at 452; cf. Holbrook v. Reno, 196 F.3d 255, 261 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (stating burden as requirement to show “that she and [a] similarly situated person were treated disparately”); Bundy v.

Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. v. NLRB

6 F.4th 1291 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 30, 2021

Inova Health Sys. v. NLRB, 795 F.3d 68, 80 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (quoting Bally’s Park Place, Inc. v. NLRB, 646 F.3d 929, 935 (D.C. Cir. 2011)). … Propert v. District of Columbia, 948 F.2d 1327, 1332 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (citing Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 127 (1990)).

Veritas Health Servs., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

895 F.3d 69 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 10, 2018

Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. NLRB , 682 F.3d 65 , 67 (D.C. Cir. 2012). In particular, we defer to the Board's well-reasoned "interpretation of its own precedent," Ceridian Corp. v. NLRB , 435 F.3d 352 , 355 (D.C. … We review the Board's denial of an administrative subpoena for abuse of discretion. See SSC Mystic Operating Co. v. NLRB , 801 F.3d 302 , 330 (D.C. Cir. 2015) ; Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. v.

Int'l Longshore & Warehouse Union v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

890 F.3d 1100 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 29, 2018

Univ. v. NLRB, 807 F.3d 308, 316 (D.C. Cir. 2015). Before the Board, ILWU did not challenge the Board remedy in light of the Employer’s settlement with IAM and its members. … See NLRB v.

Healey v. Inwood

38 App. D.C. 78 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 2, 1912

Brown moved to dissolve, claiming that Inwood & Lavenberg had no right to make the claims. … The concurrent decision of the office tribunals on questions of fact arising in interference cases are entitled to very great weight, and will not be disturbed, except for manifest error, and, as was said in Lindmark v.