Case law

Colantuoni v. MacOmber

807 F. Supp. 835 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 4, 1992

Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 13 (D.C.Cir.1985) (citing Shehandeh v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 595 F.2d 711, 727 (D.C.Cir.1978)). … Brown v. Marsh, 111 F.2d 8, 14 (D.C.Cir.1985) (citing Loe v.

White v. Secretary of Army

629 F. Supp. 64 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 1984

Oppenheim v. Campbell, 571 F.2d 660, 662 (D.C.Cir.1978). … As the court in Bethlehem Steel Corp. v.

Noha v. Noem

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 4, 2025

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).

Woubetu v. Claridge Tower

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 2023

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v.

Saucedo-Chavez v. Whasho County

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 22, 2024

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). “A confused and rambling narrative of charges and conclusions . . . does not comply with the requirements of Rule 8.” Cheeks v. Fort Myer Constr. Corp., 71 F.

Baker, Watts & Co. v. Saxon

261 F. Supp. 247 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 14, 1966

. *249 Commercial State Bank of Roseville v. Gidney, D.C., 174 F.Supp. 770 , affirmed 108 U.S.App.D.C. 37 , 278 F.2d 871 ; National Bank of Detroit v. Wayne Oakland Bank, 252 F.2d 537 (6th C.). … On May 8, 1964, the Board of Governors reiterated its views on the subject, 12 C.F.R. § 208.109 as follows: “ * * *, the Board understands that phrase [i.e. general obligations] to include only obligations that are supported

Lee v. District of Columbia

733 F. Supp. 2d 156 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 25, 2010

Macharia v. United States, 334 F.3d 61, 64, 67 (D.C.Cir.2003); Holy Land Found, for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 156, 165 (D.C.Cir.2003); Browning, 292 F.3d at 242 . … Warren v. District of Columbia, 353 F.3d 36, 40 (D.C.Cir.2004); Browning, 292 F.3d at 242 . “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”

Abdelhamid v. Lane Construction Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 12, 2024

Wiley v. Glassman, 511 F.3d 151, 156 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (quoting Brown v. 5 Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C. Cir. 1999)). … 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)). Construing Mr.

Esparraguera v. Department of the Army

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 2022

before the Merit Board itself. 5 U.S.C. §§ 3592(a). … Of Educ. v.

Knight v. Coopera

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 17, 2025

P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677–79 (2009). … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Knight’s “threadbare recitals,” which are “supported by mere conclusory statements,” are insufficient to state a claim. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.

Fisher v. Clark Construction Group, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 4, 2026

Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). And although the Court must construe Plaintiff’s pro se pleadings generously, even “pro se plaintiffs must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” … President Lines, LLC v. Matson, Inc., 633 F.

Maeztu v. Brownell

132 F. Supp. 751 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 22, 1955

Matranga v. … Supp. 84 , and also by the strong expressions of Judge Youngdahl of our Court in Alexiou v. McGrath, 101 F.

Goodrich v. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

404 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 22, 2005

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). … Students Against Genocide v. Dep’t of State, 257 F.3d 828, 833 (D.C.Cir.2001); Weisberg v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 627 F.2d 365, 368 (D.C.Cir.1980); Goland v. Cent.

United States v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers

79 F. Supp. 485 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 2, 1948

The Court thinks that the question as to whether or not this case is controlled by the United States v. … Willard Wirtz, Members of the Board. 4.

Buendorf v. National Public Radio, Inc.

822 F. Supp. 6 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 19, 1993

By using Arthur Ashe, Jerry Brown and Larry Buendorf as examples of where the press overstepped its bounds, Mr. … Now of course, Brown is a public figure. The question is, ‘Must a public figure be fair game for any kind of ambush?’

Hines v. Bair

594 F. Supp. 2d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 27, 2009

See Colbert v. Potter, 471 F.3d 158, 165 (D.C.Cir.2006); Armstrong v. Reno, 172 F.Supp.2d 11, 20 (D.D.C.2001) (citing Bowden v. United States, 106 F.3d 433, 437-38 (D.C.Cir.1997) and Brown v. … Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C.Cir.1999); see Smith v. Dist. of Columbia, 430 F.3d 450, 455 (D.C.Cir.2005).

United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 400 v. Dotson

628 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 26, 1984

Citing Leedom v. … Citing Leedom v. Kyne, 358 U.S. 184 , 79 S.Ct. 180 , 3 L.Ed.2d 210 (1958), and Miami Newspaper Printing Pressmen’s Union Local 46 v.

Rountree v. Johanns

382 F. Supp. 2d 19 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 11, 2005

Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C.Cir.1999). If he sustains this burden, the Secretary must articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory basis for his action. Thomas v. … See Brown, 199 F.3d at 456 (quoting Burlington Indus., Inc. v.

United Airlines, Inc. v. McKinnon

580 F. Supp. 189 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 10, 1983

“The Board’s interpretation of the statute and its own regulations is entitled to deference.” CAB v. United Airlines, Inc., 542 F.2d 394, 402 (D.C.Cir.1976). … Association of American Railroads v. United States, 371 F.Supp. 114, 116-17 (D.D.C.1974).

Moore v. Justice Dept.

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 16, 2014

S(a); see Ashcrof‘ v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Cz'ralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Brown v. Califarzo, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). The plaintiff, a resident of Jackson, Mississippi, purports to sue the United States Department of Justice and a construction company. Compl. at 2.