Case law

Helvestine v. Helvestine

89 F.2d 970 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 1937

Story’s Eq.Pl. (10th Ed.) § 40; English v. Foxall (1829) 2 Pet. 595 , 7 L.Ed. 531 ; Tayloe v. Merchants’ Fire Ins. Co., 9 How. 390, 405 , 13 L.Ed. 187 ; Walden v. Bodley, 14 Pet. 156, 164 , 10 L.Ed. 398 ; Texas v. … Hardenberg, 10 Wall. 68 , 19 L.Ed. 839 ; Jones v. Van Doren, 130 U.S. 684, 692 , 9 S.Ct. 685 , 32 L.Ed. 1077 ; Tyler v. Savage, 143 U.S. 79, 90 , 12 S.Ct. 340 , 36 L.Ed. 82 ; Lockhart v.

Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 29, 2011

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. 23 7, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Brown v. Calz'fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Holmes v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2019

According to the Board, Dr. … Nevertheless, the existence of conflicting evidence is not enough to find the Board’s decision unsupported by substantial evidence. See Alegent Health–Immanuel Med. Ctr. v. Sebelius, 34 F.

Sun Oil Co. v. Udall

230 F. Supp. 381 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 1964

Further, the Secretary “may provide that the Board may take such action on petitions as it deems appropriate and that the decision by the Appeals Board shall be final.” … Eustace v. Day, 114 U.S.App.D.C. 242 , 314 F.2d 247 (1962). The decision of the Appeals Board in the Sun Oil petition is based on three points.

In Re Medicare Reimbursement Litigation

309 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2004

If the provider objects to the Board's conclusion, it may seek judicial review, provided that the provider files suit within 60 days of the Board's determination. See 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(f)(1). … See Wilkinson v.

Smith v. Obama

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 24, 2010

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. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497,498 (D.D.C. 1977). 1  !

Bey v. State of Minnesota

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 21, 2012

Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). … See Ea'elman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 65l, 662-63 (1974); Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. l, 13-15 (1890). 2

Hudson v. Smart

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 18, 2009

Lott Hudson, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). In addition, the complaint must allege facts sufficient to permit the court to determine whether it has jurisdiction of the case.

Baker v. Newspaper & Graphic Communications Union, Local 6

461 F. Supp. 109 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 24, 1978

In Laturner v. … NLRB v. Erie Resistor, 373 U.S. 221 , 83 S.Ct. 1139 ; 10 L.Ed.2d 308 (1973); Oneita Knitting Mills v. NLRB, 375 F.2d 385 (4th Cir. 1967); Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers v.

American Towers, Inc. v. Williams

146 F. Supp. 2d 27 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 14, 2001

See Steffan v. Perry, 41 F.3d at 684 . … See Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976); UDC Chairs v. Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia, 56 F.3d 1469, 1472 (D.C.Cir.1995).

United States v. Tolson

1 D.C. 269 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 15, 1803

C. 163 ; 2 Hawk. 220; Doug. 796 ; 2 Hawk. 247, § 47 ; 1 Hawk. 136; and the case of The Commonwealth v. Cullins, 1 Mass. Rep. 116 . See U. S. v. Clancy, [ante, 13]; U. S. v. Hare, [ante, 82] ; U. S. v. … S. v. Brown, [ante, 210.]

Hensley v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 22, 2018

Benefits decisions may be further appealed to the relevant board for correction of military records, such as the AFBCMR. See, e.g., Blackwood v. United States, 187 F. Supp. 3d 837, 839 (W.D. Ky. 2016). … “As a preliminary matter, the Board did nothing improper by relying on an advisory opinion to render its decision.” McDonough v. Stackley, 245 F. Supp. 3d 1, 5 (D.D.C. 2017); see Roberts v.

Simpson v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

362 F. Supp. 2d 168 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 7, 2005

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 & Development v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 156, 165 (D.C.Cir.2003); Browning, 292 F.3d at 242 .

Adair v. England

209 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2002

Adair v. England, 183 F.Supp.2d 31 (D.D.C.2002). … In addition, they argue, for a chaplain to act lawfully on a promotion board, he must act as a faith-group representative. Pis.’ Mot. at 4.

Payne v. Locke

766 F. Supp. 2d 245 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 2, 2011

See, e.g., Augustus v. Locke, 699 F.Supp.2d 65, 71-72 (D.D.C.2010); Abdelkarim v. Tomlinson, 605 F.Supp.2d 116, 120 (D.D.C.2009); Brown v. Tomlinson, 462 F.Supp.2d 16, 19-20 (D.D.C.2006). … Laudadio v.

Pinson v. U.S. Department of Justice

189 F. Supp. 3d 137 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 1, 2016

I; Brown Decl., DOJ’s Ex. S; Brooks Decl., DOJ’s Ex. WW. Generally speaking, Mr. … I; Brown Decl. ¶ 1, DOJ’s Ex. R; Brooks Decl. ¶ 1, DOJ’s Ex. WW.

Hamilton v. AIG Life Insurance

182 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 15, 2002

See Brown v. … See Hightshue v. AIG Life Ins. Co., 135 F.3d at 1148 ; Brown, 898 F.2d at 1566 n. 11.

McDougald v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 23, 2010

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Evenpro 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. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff states that he has "evidents [sic] to show that [he] was the subject to the Department of Justice in reguards [sic] to criminal matters."

Freeman v. Walmart Stores

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 12, 2011

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. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, sues Wal-Mart Stores.

Humberson v. United States Attorney's Office for District of Columbia

236 F. Supp. 2d 28 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 10, 2003

Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 576 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … v.