Case law

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

473 F.2d 91 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 24, 1972

Bannercraft Clothing Co., Inc. v. The Renegotiation Board, 151 U. S.App.D.C. 174, 466 F.2d 345 (decided July 6, 1972). … While Myers v.

Spurlino Materials, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board

805 F.3d 1131 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 13, 2015

Like the Board, we find that the partial-strike precedents are a poor fit for the case before us. See Pacific Coast Supply, LLC v. NLRB, 801 F.3d 321, 333 (D.C. … See Vencare Ancillary Servs., Inc. v.

District of Columbia v. Merit Systems Protection Board

762 F.2d 129 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 21, 1985

United Mine Workers v. … Noxell Corp. v.

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

543 F.2d 247 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 1976

v. … Municipal Light Bds. v. FPC, 450 F.2d at 1346 ; accord, Associated Press v.

Gruma Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

200 F. App'x 4 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 6, 2006

This cause was considered on the record from the National Labor Relations Board, and was briefed and argued by the parties. … It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the petition for review be denied and the Board’s cross-application to enforce its order be granted.

David S. Komjathy v. National Transportation Safety Board

832 F.2d 1294 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 13, 1987

. § 1429(a) (1982), Komjathy appealed the order to the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB” or “Board”), appellee here. … See, e.g., Go Leasing, Inc. v. NTSB, 800 F.2d 1514, 1519-21 (9th Cir.1986); Pangbum v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 311 F.2d 349, 354-56 (1st Cir.1962).

Alwin Manufacturing Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

192 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 28, 1999

NLRB v. Alwin Mfg. … v.

Petrochem Insulation, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

240 F.3d 26 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 26, 2001

The Board rejected this argument, relying on DeBartolo Corp. v. Fla. Gulf Coast Bldg. & Constr. … --the Board relied on Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. v.

Civil Aeronautics Board v. American Air Transport, Inc.

201 F.2d 189 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 20, 1952

Tradesmen International, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

275 F.3d 1137 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 15, 2002

Associa- tion of Civilian Technicians v. FLRA, 269 F.3d 1112, 1117 (D.C. Cir. 2001); see also, Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. … The Board also relied on the Ninth Circuit's decision in Kaiser Engineers v.

Mueller Brass Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

180 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 13, 1950

of case. 8 N.L.R.B. v. … Co. v. N. L. R. B., 7 Cir., 1947, 162 F.2d 435, 439 ; Marlin-Roekwell Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 2 Cir., 1941, 116 F.2d 586, 587 ; Bussmann Mfg. Co. v. N. L. R.

Continental Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

522 F.2d 107 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 7, 1974

Moss v. CAB, 139 U.S.App.D.C. 150 , 430 F.2d 891 (1970), and the Board does not appear to be engaging in the “reasoned decision making” required of it, see Greater Boston Television Corp. v. … Hence, this case is similar to Moss v.

Riffin v. Surface Transportation Board

402 F. App'x 532 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 30, 2010

Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Board’s decision denying his petition for a declaratory order is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. See BNSF Railway Co. v. … The Board properly concluded that petitioner is not a “rail carrier,” because he has not shown that he has the ability to provide rail service on the Allegany Line. See Nevada v.

Town of Springfield v. Surface Transportation Board

412 F.3d 187 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 2005

ICC v. Bhd. of Locomotive Eng’rs, 482 U.S. 270, 280 (1987). … The Board’s refusal to reopen for that reason is therefore not subject to judicial review. See Entravision Holdings, LLC v. FCC, 202 F.3d 311, 313 (D.C. Cir. 2000); see also Schoenbohm v. FCC, 204 F.3d 243, 250 (D.C.

Hurt v. D.C. Parole Board

204 F. App'x 903 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 8, 2006

Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 , 105 S.Ct. 3099 , 87 L.Ed.2d 114 (1985). Such a claim must allege that the agency’s policy or custom played a role in the violation of federal law. See Monell v. Department of Soc. … Parole Board’s policy or custom.

Lancaster Symphony Orchestra v. National Labor Relations Board

822 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

See NLRB v. … In addition to these factors, the Board, also like this court, looks to see whether the workers have a “significant entrepreneurial opportunity for gain or loss.” Corporate Express Delivery Systems v.

Stanford Hospital & Clinics v. National Labor Relations Board

325 F.3d 334 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 18, 2003

In NLRB v. … NLRB v.

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

613 F.2d 890 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 25, 1979

NLRB v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 351 U.S. 105, 112 , 76 S.Ct. 679 , 100 L.Ed. 975 (1956); see NLRB v. Brown, 380 U.S. 278, 290-292 , 85 S.Ct. 980 , 13 L.Ed.2d 839 (1965). . … In NLRB v.

Riffin v. Surface Transportation Board

331 F. App'x 751 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 22, 2009

Gorman v. NTSB, 558 F.3d 580, 586 (D.C.Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted); see Clifton Power Corp. v. … Nor is it of any moment that Riffin’s petition to reopen has by now been denied by the Board. Sec Clifton Power Corp., 294 F.3d at 112 ; TeleSTAR, Inc. v. FCC, 888 F.2d 132, 134 (D.C.Cir.1989) (per curiam).

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

385 F.2d 648 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 1967

Meanwhile, in Delta Air Lines v. … Board of Pub. Util. Comm’rs v. New York Tel. Co., 271 U.S. 23 , 46 S.Ct. 363 , 70 L.Ed. 808 (1926). 30 . City of Detroit v. FPC, 97 U.S.App. D.C. 260, 230 F.2d 810 (1955), cert. denied sub nom. Panhandle E.