Case law

Pereira v. Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 2011

P. 8(a); see Ashcrofl v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. l937, 1950 (2009); Cl'ralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 66l, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). … v.

Dove v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

402 F. Supp. 2d 91 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 29, 2005

Liberatore v. … Andrews v. Louisville & Nashville R.R.

Anmed Health v. Azar

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2022

Id. § 412.92(b)(1)(v). … Corp. v. Sebelius, 657 F.3d 1, 13 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (citing Bowen v. Georgetown Univ. Hosp., 488 U.S. 204, 208 (1988)).

Noisette v. GEITHNER

693 F. Supp. 2d 60 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2010

Bowden, 106 F.3d at 437 (emphasis added); see also Bayer v. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, 956 F.2d 330, 332 (D.C.Cir.1992) (“This administrative remedies exhaustion requirement is mandatory.” (citing Brown v. Gen. Servs. … See Bowden, 106 F.3d at 437 ; see also Ikossi v. Dep’t of Navy, 516 F.3d 1037, 1044 (D.C.Cir.2008); Brown, 111 F.2d at 16. “In the D.C.

Adeyinka v. Project Home

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2024

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.

Barbadoro v. State of Massachusetts

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 21, 2009

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Natalie Carol Barbadoro, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497,498 (D.D.C. 1977). The complaint here fails to meet the requirements of Rule 8(a).

Davis v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service

481 F. Supp. 1178 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 1979

Until the decision of Afroyim v. … See, e. g., Nishikawa v.

Perry Capital LLC v. Lew

70 F. Supp. 3d 208 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2014

The logic of these decisions would appear to extend to dividends that are issued at the “sole discretion” of a GSE board—or, in this case, the regulatory entity that has succeeded to all the rights of the board. … Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 133 S. Ct. 2586, 2600 (2013) (citing Brown v. Legal Found. of Wash., 538 U.S. 216, 235 (2003)).

International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Leedom

141 F. Supp. 867 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 20, 1956

National Labor Relations Board v. Thayer Co., 1 Cir., 213 F.2d 748, 752 , 2 citing National Labor Relations Board v. … Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., 304 U.S. 333, 345 , 58 S.Ct. 904 , 82 L.Ed. 1381, 1389 ; National Labor Relations Board v. Jackson Press, Inc., 7 Cir., 201 F.2d 541, 546 .

Chaney v. Webb

District Court, District of Columbia · May 5, 2025

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff’s complaint falls far short of the Rule 8 pleading standard. … See Dist. of Columbia Ct. of Appeals v.

Edward W. Sparrow Hospital Association v. Leavitt

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 12, 2011

The decision of the Board is final unless the CMS Administrator — on his own motion and within 60 days — reverses, affirms, or modifies the Board’s decision. 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(f). … Power & Light Co. v. Lorian, 470 U.S. 729, 744 (1985).

Hudson v. Belcher

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 31, 2009

Hudson (Lott), ) ) 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 over the case.

Miller v. Caldera

138 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 19, 2001

In each year, the Army’s Order of Merit Board (“Merit Board”) denied him a promotion. … Contractors of Am. v.

Carson v. United States Office of Special Counsel

563 F. Supp. 2d 286 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 7, 2008

See 5 U.S.C. §§ 1221 (a), 2302(b)(8)(A)(i); see also Stella v. Mineta, 284 F.3d 135, 142 (D.C.Cir. 2002); Weber v. … Broida, A Guide to Merit Systems Protection Board Law & PRACTICE, Ch. 13 § IV.B.1 (2004).

Baloun v. Kerry

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2017

Date: March 30, 2017 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge … See Rabe v.

National Clients Council, Inc. v. Legal Services Corp.

617 F. Supp. 480 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 19, 1985

The Presiding Officer found that NCC thereby failed to fulfill one of its primary purposes — “to find out the problems of local board members and present those matters to the Legal Services Corporation Board and regional … Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 477 , 71 S.Ct. 456, 459 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951); see also American Textile Manufacturers Institute, Inc. v.

United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission

221 F. Supp. 584 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 19, 1963

National Labor Relations Board, 305 U.S. 197 , 59 S.Ct. 206 , 83 L.Ed. 126 ; United States v. Pierce Auto Freight Lines, 327 U.S. 515, 535-536 , 66 S.Ct. 687 , 90 L.Ed. 821 ; Atwood’s Transport Lines, Inc. v. … Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 33 , 175 F. 2d 344, 349 ; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Martin Brothers Box Co., 9 Cir., 219 F.2d 811, 813 ; American Union Transport, Inc. v.

Dunning v. Ware

253 F. Supp. 3d 290 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2017

The second highest scoring candidate was Roselyn Brown (“Brown”), who scored 39 out of 60. Id. Plaintiff scored 19 out of 60, which placed him as the sixth highest scoring candidate out of seven applicants. Id. at 20. … See, e.g., Washington v. Chao, 577 F.

Deal v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2014

See Haz'rzes v. Kerrzer, 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. Calz'fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977). The complaint is presented on a preprinted form designed for the filing of a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a prisoner.

Dantzler v. Jorden

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 20, 2024

The Court must construe a pro se complaint together with all the plaintiff’s filings, see Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C. … See United States v. Choi, 818 F. Supp. 2d 79 (D.D.C. 2011) (citing Trackwell v. U.S. Gov’t, 472 F.3d 1242, 1247 (10th Cir. 2007); Liberation News Serv. v. Eastland, 426 F.2d 1379, 1384 (2d Cir. 1970); King v.