Case law

Sobin v. Washington Dc Board of Elections

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 20, 2026

Board of Elections (“Board”) certified the seat as vacant. Sobin wanted a second chance to run. … Boykin v. Fenty, 650 Fed. App’x 42, 44 (D.C. Cir. 2016). And Sobin cannot demonstrate that the Board denied him a reasonable accommodation, not least because he never alleges having requested one. See, e.g., Pappas v.

Epps v. United States Capitol Police Board

719 F. Supp. 2d 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2010

Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 156, 165 (D.C.Cir.2003); Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002). … Warren v. District of Columbia, 353 F.3d 36, 39-40 (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.”

Bullard Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

253 F. Supp. 391 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 5, 1966

In Norris v. National Labor Relations Board, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 106 , 177 F.2d 26 (1949), the employer based its suit on grounds similar to that in Atlas Life Insurance Company v. … The Court need not depend upon its own interpretation of Leedom v. Kyne to justify this result, for the Board itself has at least on one occasion stated that Leedom v.

Turner v. United States Capitol Police Board

983 F. Supp. 2d 98 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2013

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Brown, 199 F.3d at 457 (quoting Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 765 (1998)).

United States v. Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 1, 2012

U.S. v. Kellogg, Brown & Root Servs., Inc., __ F.R.D. __, 2012 WL 3776708 (D.D.C. 2012) (ECF Nos. 116, 117). … That Opinion indicated that defendant Kellogg, Brown & Root (“KBR”) is entitled to limited discovery on force protection matters relating to the parties’ LOGCAP III agreement. U.S. v. KBR, 2012 WL 3776708 at *10–*12.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Brown

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 19, 2012

SEC v. Brown, 740 F. Supp. 2d 148, 172 (D.D.C. 2010). … SEC v. Brown, 740 F. Supp. 2d at 172; see In re Alsom SA, 406 F.

British Airports Authority v. Civil Aeronautics Board

531 F. Supp. 408 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 14, 1982

Release of the memorandum would have a chilling effect on the flow of information both within the Board and between the Board and other agencies involved with this problem. … Forsham v.

MacOn v. United States Capitol Police Board

258 F. Supp. 3d 94 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 29, 2017

Macon filed a Complaint in which he alleged that his employer, defendant United States Capitol Police Board, discriminated against him in violation of the CAA. Am. Compl., ECF No. 4. In Count I, Mr. … Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002).

Brown v. Secretary of the Army

89 F. App'x 275 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 5, 2004

See Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804, 808-10 (D.C.Cir.1988) (en banc); Monk v. Secretary of the Navy, 793 F.2d 364, 366-68 (D.C.Cir.1986). … Linda R.S. v.

United States v. Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 3, 2011

Wilson v. Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 525 F.3d 370, 373–74 (4th Cir. 2008) (explaining and interpreting the LOGCAP contract in a different dispute); United States ex rel. McBride v. … Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

Adams v. United States Capitol Police Board

564 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 2008

Background Plaintiff Frank Adams is a 54 year-old African-American Lieutenant with the United States Capitol Police Board (“USCP”). Compl. ¶ 1. … Plaintiffs claims against defendant United States Capitol Police Board shall be dismissed. An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion. 1 .

Isbrandtsen Co. v. Federal Maritime Board

159 F. Supp. 884 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 1958

As was said in Perkins v. … Even if this is true, it would not be outside of the authority of the Board and would not be within the jurisdiction of this Court to enjoin. The decision of the Supreme Court in Larson v.

Sataki v. Broadcasting Board of Governors

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 13, 2010

See Sataki v. Broadcasting Board of Governors, __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2010 WL 2195799 (D.D.C. June 1, 2010); Sataki v. Broadcasting Board of Governors, __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2010 WL 2679893 (D.D.C. July 7, 2010); Sataki v. … See Sataki v. Broadcasting Board of Governors, __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2010 WL 2679893 (D.D.C.

Mang v. Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 14, 2023

) Civil Action No. 23-cv-02283 (TSC) ) MUNICIPAL SECURITIES ) RULEMAKING BOARD, ) … See Vanzant v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth., 557 F. Supp. 2d 113, 117 (D.D.C. 2008) (“The WCA is the exclusive remedy for a workplace injury.”) (citing D.C. Code § 32-1504(a)).

Almutairi v. Chairman, Broadcasting Board of Governors

928 F. Supp. 2d 219 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 11, 2013

At the time Almutairi applied, Radio Sawa was part of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, “a federal agency responsible for the U.S. … In the Order accompanying this Opinion, the Court will accordingly substitute “Chairman, Broadcasting Board of Governors” for Isaacson in the caption. See Fed. R. Civ.

Brown v. Executive Office for United State Attorneys

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2021

United States v. Brown, 650 Fed. App’x 836 (4th Cir. 2016) (per curiam). He is serving a prison term of 204 months, see id. … See Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Brown

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 27, 2010

Moreover, the Browning-Ferris court also ruled that plaintiffs failed to allege any relationship between the pending civil lawsuits and the directors elected to the board during the relevant period of time. Id. at 367. … Defendant Brown’s Motion to Dismiss Count V is therefore denied. 4.

Giri v. National Board of Medical Examiners

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 27, 2025

Although licensing boards can enjoy “complete control over access [to] the regulated professional job market,” “such boards have been routinely held not to be employers.” Johnson v. Greater Se. Cmty. Hosp. … Employing the same logic, courts have held that Title VII does not apply to bar examination boards or to the American Board of Internal Medicine. See Woodard v.

Haralson v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board

655 F. Supp. 1550 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 13, 1987

The Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 , 105 S.Ct. 1487 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985), case relied on by plaintiffs is inapplicable here. … See Comm’r v. Shapiro, 424 U.S. 614 , 96 S.Ct. 1062 , 47 L.Ed.2d 278 (1976).

Barry v. United States Capitol Guide Board

636 F. Supp. 2d 95 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 21, 2009

Dist. v. … .”); Facha v.