Case law

Kinkaid v. McDonald

208 F. Supp. 3d 212 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 22, 2016

Petitioner requested a Disciplinary Appeals Board (“DAB”) hearing, which was held in December 2012. Id. The DAB upheld five of the charges against petitioner in whole and two in part, and rejected one charge. Id. … Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). Under Rule 12(b)(1), the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Lujan v.

Bulris v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 14, 2013

Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff lists her address as a women’s shelter in the District of Columbia.

Rushing v. Social Security Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 24, 2023

Ashcroft v. … See Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). The standard also assists the court in determining whether it has jurisdiction over the subject matter.

Amore Ex Rel. Estates of Amore v. Accor, S.A.

484 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 2007

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002). The complaint need only set forth a short and plain statement of the claim, giving the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests. … 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 .

Gray v. District of Columbia

477 F. Supp. 2d 76 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2007

. *79 Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002). The complaint need only set forth a short and plain statement of the claim, giving the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests. … 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 .

Malden Transp., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.

321 F. Supp. 3d 174 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 18, 2018

Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. , 509 U.S. 209 , 222, 224, 113 S.Ct. 2578 , 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993). … Ltd. v.

Owens v. District of Columbia

923 F. Supp. 2d 241 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 14, 2013

Owens initially attended a MPD Police Trial Board hearing with her counsel and received a subsequent review of the Trial Board’s decision by the Chief of Police. … c) OEA Board review.

Long v. Safeway, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 26, 2010

P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661,668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Brown v.

Kenney v. Swift Trans, Incorporated

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 2012

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. Tz`sch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). The "Draft Complaint," replete with typographical errors and sentence fragments, mentions an arbitration proceeding.

Julius v. Smithsonian Institution

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 27, 2009

DISTRICT COURT' TYRONE JULIUS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiffs complaint sets forth no facts at all, and utterly fails to comply with the minimal requirements of Rule 8(a).

Moorman v. Ciba-Geigy Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 23, 2012

P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661,668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Brown v.

De Pusana v. United States

164 F. Supp. 672 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 1958

This was in accordance with the almost unanimous view, until the recent case of Soriano v. … The Government relies upon Neely v. U. S., 4 Cir., 1940, 115 F.2d 448 and Simmons v. United States, 4 Cir., 1940, 111 F.2d 618 . But these cases specifically reject the language of the Kosario decision.

Howard v. Office of the Chief Administrative Officer of the United States House of Representatives

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 2011

See United States v. Rayburn House Office Bldg., Room 2113, Wash., D.C. 20515, 497 F.3d 654, 659–60 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (citing Gravel, 408 U.S. at 616; Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. … Browning stood until 2006, when the D.C. Circuit issued its en banc decision in Fields v. Office of Eddie Bernice Johnson, 459 F.3d 1.

Myrick v. Johnson

199 F. Supp. 3d 120 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 4, 2016

Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190, 1193, 1194 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (emphases omitted). … Archive v. FBI, 759 F. Supp. 872, 885 (D.D.C. 1991); Jaffe v. CIA, 573 F.

Lockheed Martin Corporation v. United States

35 F. Supp. 3d 92 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 24, 2014

United States v. … See Beazer E., Inc. v.

Gemmell v. Federal Aviation Administration

558 F. Supp. 918 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 1982

McKart v. United States, 895 U.S. 185 , 89 S.Ct. 1657 , 23 L.Ed.2d 194 (1969); Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Co., 303 U.S. 41 , 58 S.Ct. 459 , 82 L.Ed. 638 (1938). … Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2709 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). See also Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 602-03 , 92 S.Ct. 2694, 2700 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972).

Julius v. Leak

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 9, 2012

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 5l9, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 23 7, 239 (D.D.C. l987). … Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977).

Terrell v. McDonald's Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · May 3, 2016

S(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbaf, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Ct`ralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 66l, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … Brown v. C`alg`fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Day v. D.C. Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs

191 F. Supp. 2d 154 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2002

See Brown v. United States, 742 F.2d 1498 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc). … See Brown, 742 F.2d at 1500 n. 2, 1509-10. C.

Mason v. American Prospect, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2024

In 2019, IWPR’s Board of Directors removed Dr. … Mason”; “[Board member Joan] Marsh said . . . Dr. Mason has had an open, frequent[,] and productive dialogue with the Board about her progress[.]”).