Case law

Rastall v. CSX Corp.

696 F. Supp. 683 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 8, 1988

Air Line Dispatchers Ass’n v. National Mediation Board, 189 F.2d 685, 687, 690 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 849 , 72 S.Ct. 77 , 96 L.Ed. 641 (1951); Air Line Stewards and Stewardesses Ass’n v. … Smith v. Evening News Assn., 371 U.S. 195 , 83 S.Ct. 267 , 9 L.Ed.2d 246 (1962); Windward Shipping Ltd. v. American Radio Assn., 415 U.S. 104, 110 , 94 S.Ct. 959, 963 , 39 L.Ed.2d 195 (1974); Benz v.

Daniel v. Fulwood

893 F. Supp. 2d 42 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 27, 2012

Marshall v. Honeywell Technology Solutions, Inc., 598 F.Supp.2d 57, 59 (D.D.C.2009)(quoting Lederman v. … R.Civ.P. 8 are not entitled to discovery); United States v. Marshall, 526 F.2d 1349, 1355 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied sub nom. Marshall v.

United States v. Eichman

731 F. Supp. 1123 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 1990

See, e.g., Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131 , 86 S.Ct. 719 , 15 L.Ed.2d 637 (1966) (silent sit-in by blacks demonstrating against a segregated library); Tinker v. … See e.g., Spence, 418 U.S. at 409-410 , 94 S.Ct. at 2729-2730 , (affixing a peace symbol to the flag); Virginia Board of Edu *1128 cation v.

Baraldini v. Meese

691 F. Supp. 432 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 19, 1988

Noto v. … Two district court rulings present facts analogous to those here and are in many respects instructive: Brown v. Neagle, 486 F.Supp. 364 (W.Va.1979) and Boudin v.

State of South Carolina v. United States of America

898 F. Supp. 2d 30 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 10, 2012

Reno v. Bossier Parish School Board, 520 U.S. 471, 488 , 117 S.Ct. 1491 , 137 L.Ed.2d 730 (1997). … See Allen v. State Board of Elec tions, 393 U.S. 544, 554-55 , 89 S.Ct. 817 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1969).

Westfahl v. District of Columbia

75 F. Supp. 3d 365 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 12, 2014

Scott v. District of Columbia, 101 F.3d 748, 755 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (quoting Brown v. Hamilton, 601 A.2d 1074, 1079 (D.C. 1992)). … K (Police Complaints Board OPC Annual Report Fiscal Year 2010 (“2010 OPC Report”)). 3) The Use of Force Review Board (“UFRB”)—a three-person board that reviews use of force investigations to determine next

Hardy v. Geren

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 10, 2010

Under the APA, the court can set aside Corrections Board decisions that are “arbitrary, capricious or not based on substantial evidence.” See, e.g., Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296, 303 (1983). … Lebrun v. England, 212 F. Supp. 2d 5, 14 (D.D.C. 2002). That “unusually deferential” standard means that a Corrections Board need only provide a “rational connection” between the facts and the ultimate decision.

Parker v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 2023

See Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C. … Although the Court is mindful that a pro se complaint “must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,” Brown v.

Line Material Co. v. Coe

40 F. Supp. 633 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 6, 1941

These rulings of the Patent Examiner were approved by the Board of Appeals. … As said by Commissioner Allen in Dow v. Converse, cited by counsel for the Patent Office, “The question was not whether Dow was in the possession of the invention, but whether he disclosed it.

Jacobsen v. Oliver

555 F. Supp. 2d 72 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 16, 2008

See, e.g., Brown v. … Gesellschaft Fur Drahtlose Telegraphie v. Brown, 78 F.2d 410, 413 (D.C.1935) (“Brown J”); see also Brown II, 104 F.2d at 229 .

Clark v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 26, 2024

See, e.g., Brown v. Sessoms, 774 F.3d 1016, 1020 (D.C. Cir. 2014); Nanko, 850 F.3d at 467. … See Comcast Corp., 589 U.S. at 343; Brown, 774 F.3d at 1022.

Morales v. Gotbaum

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 17, 2012

See id.; Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 457 (D.C. Cir. 1999) abrograted on other grounds by Steele v. Schafer, 535 F.3d 689 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. v. Whitman

214 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 22, 2002

While there can be no question that in many instances Congress grants courts the ability to exercise broad equitable powers to fashion appropriate remedies, see, e.g., Renegotiation Board v. … Bamford, 538 F.2d 63, 71 (3d Cir.1976) (judicial efficiency should be considered when determining whether to grant equitable relief); Board of Regents of Univ. of Okla. v. NCAA, 546 F.Supp. 1276 (W.D.Okla.1982) (same).

James v. American Public University Systems

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 28, 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  The complaint is indeed short, but its meager allegations fail to state a plausible legal claim.

Cromartie v. District of Columbia

729 F. Supp. 2d 281 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 6, 2010

See Wasserman v. … See Scales v.

Federal Trade Commission v. CCC Holdings Inc.

605 F. Supp. 2d 26 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 2009

United States v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 415 U.S. 486, 505 , 94 S.Ct. 1186 , 39 L.Ed.2d 530 (1974); see also Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 323 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962); United States v. … (quoting United States v. Grinnell Corp., 236 F.Supp. 244, 254 (D.R.I.1964)); accord Whole Foods, 548 F.3d at 1038 (Brown, J.). But see United States v.

Haughton v. District of Columbia

161 F. Supp. 3d 100 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2014

United States v. Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., 284 F.R.D. 22, 30 (D.D.C.2012) (alterations in original) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(d)); see also Franco-Gonzalez v. … Corp. v. MGA Elecs., Inc., 227 F.R.D. 313, 322 (C.D.Cal.2004) (same (collecting cases)); Graske v. Auto-Owners Ins.

Dunlap v. Superior Court of the City of San Berbardino

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 5, 2015

Dunlap, ) I u ) Petltlonel‘, ; Case; 1:15—cv—00837 V ) Assigned To : Unassolglged ' Assign. … Dunlap v. Dep ’t of Review Board, No. 14-0145, 2014 WL 414156 (D.D.C. Jan. 30, 2014), citing Dunlap v. Board ofPrison Hearings, No. 1:08- cv-1770, 2009 WL 1759651, at *3 (ED. Cal.

Crockwell v. Austin

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 9, 2024

Taucher v. Brown-Hruska, 396 F.3d 1168, 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2005). If the court determines that a fee award is warranted, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the reasonableness of the requested fee award. … Likewise, in Michigan v.

Humana of South Carolina, Inc. v. Mathews

419 F. Supp. 253 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 7, 1976

Kingsbrook, supra; Sanders v. Weinberger, 522 F.2d 1167 (C.A.7, 1975); Cappadora v. Celebrezze, 356 F.2d 1 (C.A.2, 1966); Pickus v. U. S. Board of Parole, 507 F.2d 1107 (C.A.D.C., 1974). … Mathews, 526 F.2d 950 (C.A.5, 1976); Sanders v. Weinberger, 522 F.2d 1170 (C.A.7, 1975); Wallace v. Weinberger, 528 F.2d 700 (C.A.6, 1976); Ryan v. Shea, 525 F.2d 268 (C.A.10, 1975); but compare, St. Louis University v.