Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersdcd

10,000+ results

0.46s

  • Council of Prison Locals v. Howlett

    562 F. Supp. 849 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 28, 1983

    Switchmen’s Union of North America v. National Mediation Board, 320 U.S. 297, 301 , 64 S.Ct. 95, 97 , 88 L.Ed. 61 (1943). … That the Board may have made an error of fact or law is insufficient; the Board must have acted without statutory authority. Physicians Nat. House Staff Ass’n v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • McKeeman v. Randy

    District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 2026

    Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quotations omitted). … See Brown v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • United States v. Eiland

    525 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 27, 2007

    Charles Brown, another participant in the conspiracy, was paid by defendant Miller to accept a package of drugs delivered to Brown’s residence. (Trial Tr., 32, Oct. 18, 2006.) … accept a parcel of narcotics that was mailed to Brown’s residence.

    Reversed on other grounds by United States v. Alvin Gaskins, 690 F.3d 569 (2012)Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Crum v. United States Parole Commission

    814 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 14, 1993

    In particular Petitioner believes that the cases of Cosgrove v. Smith, 697 F.2d 1125 (D.C.Cir.1983), and its progeny Cosgrove v. … However, the habeas relief recognized in Morrissey v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Cardwell v. Investor's Analysis, Inc.

    620 F. Supp. 1395 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 1985

    The Court also notes that defendant's appearance before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board does not constitute "doing business" for purposes of long-arm jurisdiction. See E. & J. Gallo Winery v. … See, e.g., Barr Rubber Products Co. v. Burlington *1398 Mills, Inc., 306 F.2d 268, 269 (D.C.Cir.1962); Hayes v. Livermont, 279 F.2d 818, 818 (D.C.Cir.1960); Chris Laganas Shoe Co. v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Solomon v. Solomon

    District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 18, 2025

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CARGYLE BROWN SOLOMON, ) ) Plaintiff, … Richardson v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 83 F.3d 1513, 1514 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (relying on District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983) and Rooker v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Spicer v. Biden

    District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2022

    See id. at 4 (citing Swan v. Clinton, 100 F.3d 973, 976 (D.C. Cir. 1996)). Second, it held that the plaintiffs’ removal from the Board was traceable to the defendants. See id. … Kingdomware Techs., Inc. v. United States, 579 U.S. 162, 172 (2016) (citation omitted). But here, the phrase “shall continue” falls outside the portion of § 8468(b) that describes Board members’ terms of service.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Landmark Hospital of Savannah, LLC v. Azar

    District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 2, 2020

    The Court reviews the Board’s final decisions under the APA’s standards of review. 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(f)(1); Nursing Ctr. of Buckingham & Hampden, Inc. v. … Home Servs. v. Burwell, 824 F.3d 968, 970 (10th Cir. 2016) (Gorsuch, J.) (cleaned up). But there is another reason the Board’s analysis was flawed.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Communist Party of United States v. McGrath

    96 F. Supp. 47 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 1951

    Under United States v. … ." [10] See Rogers v.

    Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Stutler v. Heflin

    46 F. Supp. 539 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 25, 1942

    West v. Bauduit, 59 App.D.C. 74, 75 , 33 F.2d 370 . … Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U. S. 411, 415 , 54 S.Ct. 487 , 78 L.Ed. 882 ; Gunning v. Cooley, 281 U.S. 90, 94 , 50 S.Ct. 231 , 74 L.Ed. 720 ; Jackson v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Shima v. Shima

    139 F.2d 533 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 27, 1943

    Shima v. Shima, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 370 , 130 F.2d 809 . D.c.Code 1940, § 16-410. Myers v. Myers, 55 App.D.C. 224 , 4 F.2d 300 ; Tendler v. Tendler, 56 App.D.C. 296 , 12 F.2d 831 ; Boardman v. … See Brown, Personal Property, (1936) 503, 504.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Jalloh v. District of Columbia

    968 F. Supp. 2d 203 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 17, 2013

    Testimony of Nicole Garcia [10-1] at AR 683; Testimony of Cordester Brown [10-1] at AR 441-442. … Testimony of Cordester Brown [10-1] at AR 439-40.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Elmore v. Long Beach Post Office

    District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 31, 2025

    See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). 1 Plaintiff alleges there are “no guards” at a Post Office in Long Beach, California, Compl.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Rodriguez v. Penrod

    District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 11, 2020

    Johnson v. Panetta, 953 F. … See Peguero v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Flying Tigers Oil Co. v. Flying Tigers Line, Inc.

    118 F.R.D. 263 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 14, 1988

    The Flying Tigers Oil Co., Inc. v. The Flying Tigers Line, Inc., et al, 87 Civ. 7597 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 1987). For present purposes we need only state the following salient facts of this old and unusual case. … In the ensuing seven years the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (“Trademark Board” or “Board”) concerned itself with applications submitted by the other named plaintiffs in this action requesting permission to intervene

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Adams v. McConnell

    District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 2020

    See Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Williams, 62 F.3d 408, 415 (D.C. … See Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205, 1209 (D.C.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • National Harbor Gp, LLC v. Government of the District of Columbia

    121 F. Supp. 3d 11 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 17, 2015

    The Board’s Order is a public record, and the Court may take judicial notice of it in considering this Motion. See Covad Communications Co. v. Bell Atl. Corp., 407 F.3d 1220, 1222 (D.C. … This includes operations for the District of Columbia Lottery Board (“Lottery Board”). See id.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State

    District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 13, 2019

    Gardels v. … Brown explains in detail why this is so.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Mitchell v. Garland

    District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 1, 2024

    Brown v. Sessoms, 774 F.3d 1016, 1022 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (quoting George v. Leavitt, 407 F.3d 405, 412 (D.C. Cir. 2005)). … Instead, her allegations are more akin to Mohmand v. Broadcasting Board of Governors, No. 17-CV-618, 2018 WL 4705800 (D.D.C.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Wayne v. McPhee

    District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 16, 2026

    P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668–71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.