Case law

Mosley v. United States

425 F. Supp. 50 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 5, 1977

Brown v. General Services Administration, 425 U.S. 820 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976). Second, counsel also properly observes that the only proper defendant in this case under 42 U.S.C. … Chandler v. Roudebush, 425 U.S. 840 , 96 S.Ct. 1949 , 48 L.Ed.2d 416 (1976) (holding that federal employees have the same right to trial de novo in the district court on Title VII claims as private employees); Brown v.

Olff v. East Side Union High School District

305 F. Supp. 557 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 1, 1969

.”); Breen v. … Brown, 299 F.Supp. 1360, 1362 (N.D.Ala.1969) (“classification of male students * * * by their hair style is unreasonable and fails to pass constitutional muster.”)

Redfern v. American President Lines, Ltd.

228 F. Supp. 227 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 10, 1963

In Bifferato v. States Marine Corp. of Del., 11 F.R.D. 44 (S.D.N.Y.1951), decided subsequent to Hickman v. Taylor, supra, the Court, citing Hickman v. … (See Hickman v. Taylor, supra).

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 31, 2026

See United States v. … Ashcroft v.

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · May 19, 2026

USPS needn’t accommodate her disability through an indefinite, decade-long leave of absence when Brown never appears to have stated “when and under what conditions [she] could return to work.” Dark v. … Brown hasn’t identified any protected “liberty” or “property” interest that she lost from USPS’s alleged misconduct, as necessary to maintain this claim. Regino v.

Matson Navigation Company v. Connor

258 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 10, 1966

B. v. … Accordingly Matson’s attempt at hanging the spectre of Brown Shoe Co. v. U. S., 370 U.S. 294 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 over States is futile.

Lingo v. Stone

401 F. Supp. 464 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 16, 1975

The Court noted that no precise standards for undertaking that scrutiny have been delineated, but adopted the sensible and workable formulation set forth in Judge Browning’s concurring opinion in Sturm, supra, 395 F.2d at … the Board’s objectivity and impartiality.

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 10, 2026

P. 12(h)(3); see also Snell v. … Co. v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149, 152 (1908).

San Francisco NAACP v. San Francisco Unified School District

484 F. Supp. 657 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 18, 1979

See, e. g., Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, 377 U.S. 218, 232 , 84 S.Ct. 1226, 1233 , 12 L.Ed.2d 256 (1964); Cooper v. … Buchanan, 379 F.Supp. 1218, 1221-22 (D.Del.1974); Oliver v. Kalamazoo Board of Education, 368 F.Supp. 143, 190-91 (W.D.Mich.1973), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 963 , 95 S.Ct. 1950 , 44 L.Ed.2d 449 (1975). Indeed, Brown v.

Reilly v. Hearst Corp.

107 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 27, 2000

See Brief Amicus Curie of the United States at 23, nl5, filed in Hawaii v. … According to White, Brown replied that he was doing no more *1207 than was politically minimally necessary to placate the board of supervisors and other constituents, and that Attorney General Reno had told him there would

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 11, 2026

Commodity Futures Trading 6 Comm'n v. … Brown v.

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 28, 2026

Publications, Inc. v. Multistate Legal Stud., Inc., 22 26 F.3d 948, 953 (9th Cir. 1994) (citing General Signal Corp. v. … Brown makes multiple 16 variants of this same argument.

Williams v. Alameda County Board of Supervisors

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 3, 2024

15 ALAMEDA COUNTY, ALAMEDA COUNTY 16 BOARD … Hoye v.

Czechowski v. Tandy Corp.

731 F. Supp. 406 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 14, 1990

Defendant also relies on Franchise Tax Board v. … Marshall v. Brown, 141 Cal.App.3d 408, 418-19 , 190 Cal.Rptr. 392, 399-400 (2d Dist.1983) (statutory penalties under Cal.Lab.Code § 1054 are penal, precluding simultaneous award of punitive damages); Troensegaard v.

Heath v. Redbud Hospital District

436 F. Supp. 766 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 12, 1977

Clark v. Washington, 366 F.2d 678, 681 (9th Cir. 1966). A state college is not a “person.” Whitner v. Davis, 410 F.2d 24, 29 (9th Cir. 1969). A state university board of regents is not a “person.” Sellers v. … Harvey v. Sadler, 331 F.2d 387, 390 (9th Cir. 1964), cited with approval, Brown v. Town of Caliente, 392 F.2d 546, *768 547 (9th Cir. 1968).

Schaeffer v. Gregory Village Partners, L.P.

78 F. Supp. 3d 1198 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 26, 2015

Kevin Brown and Chuck Headlee, 753, 785, 786, 808, 812, 990, and 1141-45. … In U.S. v.

La Rose v. Young

139 F. Supp. 516 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 23, 1956

Weidman v. Sweeney, D.C.E.D.Pa., 117 F.Supp. 739 . There Weidman had been classified . 1-A-O by his draft board. … In Hiatt v. Brown, 339 U.S. 103, 111 , 70 S.Ct. 495, 498 , 94 L.Ed. 691 , the.

Brotherhood of Painters v. Brotherhood of Painters, LU 127

264 F. Supp. 301 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 30, 1966

In Parks v. … In Parks v.

Montague v. The Henry B. Hyde

82 F. 681 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 31, 1897

Libel to recover damages alleged to have been susrained by the breakage of certain articles of hardware shipped at the port of New York on board the ship Henry B. … Scannell, 13 Cal. 278 , and Norris v. Harris, 15 Cal. 252 . It may be that the later decisions of the supreme court of the state of California, commencing with the case of Brown v.

Guerrero v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation

119 F. Supp. 3d 1065 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 21, 2015

In Flores-Figueroa v. … El v. SEPTA 479 F.3d 232 , 244-45 (3d Cir.2007).