Case law

Stevens v. Summerfield

151 F. Supp. 343 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 25, 1957

Plaintiffs rely upon the decision in American Civil Liberties Union v. … Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 , 67 S.Ct. 504 , 91 L.Ed. 711 . . People v. State of Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 , 68 S.Ct. 461 , 92 L.Ed. 648 .

United States v. White

122 F. Supp. 664 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 10, 1954

He pulled aside a movable partition filling the opening of the fireplace and saw two brown paper bags of the type used generally in grocery stores, about eight by four inches and approximately twelve to fourteen inches high … United States, 1927, 275 U.S. 192 , 48 S.Ct. 74 , 72 L.Ed. 231 , and Harris v. United States, 1947, 331 U.S. 145 , 67 S.Ct. 1098 , 91 L.Ed. 1399 , as applied in Palmer v.

Federal Trade Commission v. Cardinal Health, Inc.

12 F. Supp. 2d 34 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 1998

See Brown Shoe Co. v. … (citing Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 344 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962)).

Lawson v. Sessions

District Court, District of Columbia · May 24, 2018

DATE: May 24, 2018 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge 1 Because … See Winston & Strawn, LLP v. McLean, 843 F.3d 503, 505 (D.C.

Manga v. U.S. Small Business Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 5, 2025

“Pursuant to th[ese] regulation[s], the Merit Board itself, not this Court, is the appropriate forum. This Court has no authority to enforce such orders.” Lodge v. U.S. … See Wilder v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., No. 09-cv-00615, 2009 WL 935813, at *1 (D.D.C. Apr. 2, 2009) (quoting Arakawa v. Reagan, 666 F. Supp. 254, 257 (D.D.C. 1987)).

Coleman v. Lanier

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 8, 2011

See Haz`nes 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. 1987). … Brown v. Calz`fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977). The complaint alleges ""Improper use of Police Procedure," apparently through "Harassment, stalking threating [sic] Behavior by Police Officers as Unbecoming."

K.Y. v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 16, 2026

Brown v. District of Columbia, 928 F.3d 1070, 1081 (D.C. Cir. 2019). … Brown, 928 F.3d at 1081. As courts in this District have recognized, “due process claims may be difficult to resolve through classwide proceedings.” C.G.B. v. Wolf, 464 F.

Aguayo v. Harvey

445 F. Supp. 2d 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 24, 2006

Instead, the court must “search the [administrative] record for some affirmative evidence to support the local board’s overt or implicit finding.” Dickinson v. … Carbon Co. v. OSHRC, 860 F.2d 479 , 483 (D.C.Cir.1988).

Washington Legal Foundation v. Friedman

13 F. Supp. 2d 51 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 1998

See, e.g., Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603 , 87 S.Ct. 675 , 17 L.Ed.2d 629 (1967); Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University v. … Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v.

Clayton v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 20, 2019

Circuit cases have also approved of using the Browning-Ferris test to resolve joint-employment claims. See Browning-Ferris Indus. v. NLRB, 911 F.3d 1195, 1209 (D.C. … NLRB v. Browning-Ferris Indus., 691 F.2d 1117, 1124 (3d Cir. 1982). “This is ‘essentially a factual issue.’” Dunkin’ Donuts Mid-Atl. Distribution Center v. NLRB, 363 F.3d 437, 440 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (quoting Boire v.

Daniel v. Fulwood

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 13, 2018

Board’s guidelines “had no formalized scoring system” (quoting Davis v. Henderson, 652 A.2d 634, 635 (D.C. 1995)). Additionally, the 1972 guidelines did not limit the D.C. Board’s evaluation to six factors. … Parole Board’s practice in applying the parole eligibility factors to a similar class of offenders. See Garner v.

Bey v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 2, 2026

See Compl. at 1-2, United States v. Amin-Bey, No. 16-CR-91 (D.N.J. Aug. 18, 2011), ECF No. 1. In 2016, he pleaded guilty to the one-count information. Minute Entry, United States v. Amin-Bey, No. 16-CR-91 (D.N.J. … Klayman v. Rao, 49 F.4th 550, 552 (D.C. Cir. 2022) (per curiam) (quoting Smalls v. United States, 471 F.3d 186, 192 (D.C. Cir. 2006)); see Calderon v. Brown, No. 15-CV-75, 2015 WL 222164, at *1 (D.D.C.

Kollsman v. Ladd

226 F. Supp. 186 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 28, 1964

In support of their position, the Board cited Whittier v. Borchardt, 154 F.2d 552 [33 CCPA 1023], 69 U.S.P.Q. 382 (C.C.P.A.1946), and Lavin v. Pierotti, 129 F.2d 883 [29 CCPA 1235], 54 U.S.P.Q. 400 (C.C.P.A.1942). … Watson v. Bersworth, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 187 , 251 F.2d 898 (1958).

Pierce v. District of Columbia

146 F. Supp. 3d 197 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 25, 2015

Ctr. v. Advantage Healthplan Inc., 985 F. … See Singh v. George Washington Univ., 383 F.

Mallgren v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 1, 2026

Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff’s allegations are neither clear nor direct, see Fed. R. Civ. … Corp. v.

Tefera v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

19 F. Supp. 3d 212 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 31, 2014

Just as in Tefera v. … See, e.g., McIntyre v. Fulwood, 892 F.

Cobell v. Salazar

816 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 5, 2011

. --7-- Supreme Court’s decision in Marek v. … And the last case cited for this proposition, O’Keefe v. Mercedes-Benz United States, LLC, 214 F.R.D. 266 (E.D.

Lovitt v. District of Columbia

942 F. Supp. 618 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 29, 1995

See Conner v. United States, 309 F.Supp. 446 (D.D.C.1970), aff'd, 461 F.2d 1259 (D.C.Cir.1972); Leary v. District of Columbia, 166 F.Supp. 542 (D.D.C.1958). The Court is not persuaded. … of Elections, Public Service Commission, Armory Board, Board of Education, the Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia, or the Convention Center Board of Directors to the Council pursuant to an act

Americans for Immigrant Justice v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 6, 2025

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Council of the Blind v. Paulson, 525 F.3d 1256, 1266 (D.C. Cir. 2008)). This inquiry is necessarily fact-intensive. See Solomon v. Vilsack, 763 F.3d 1, 10 (D.C. Cir. 2014); Brown v.

Misu v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 2, 2009

See Haz`nes v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the F ederal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tz`sch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977). The complaint sets forth no factual allegations of any kind, and the Court cannot nd determine the basis of her claims.