Case law

Mwabira-Simera v. Howard University

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 2013

Drake v. FAA, 291 F.3d 59, 66 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (emphasis in original) (citing l Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 (1980)); see I.A.M Nat’l Pension Funa’ v. Ina’us. Gear Mfg. Co., 723 F.2d 944, 949 (D.C. … Cir. 2010) (citing Arizona v. Calzfornia, 530 U.S. 392, 412-13 (2000); Brown v. D.C., 514 F.3d 1279, 1285-86 (D.C.

Central Iowa Hospital Corp. v. Sebelius

762 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 2011

Luke’s Hosp. v. Sebelius, 611 F.3d 900 (D.C.Cir.2010). In St. … Luke’s Hosp. v.

Management Information Technologies, Inc. v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

151 F.R.D. 478 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 2, 1993

See also, Hathaway v. … In another case involving these same parties, Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v.

Davis v. Dalton

929 F. Supp. 467 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 6, 1996

Harding v. Gray, 9 F.3d 150, 154 (D.C.Cir.1993). … Laningham v. U.S. Navy, 813 F.2d 1236, 1241 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam) (citing Anderson, supra).

Weisser v. Obama

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 21, 2013

(internal quotations omitted); see Hagans v. … Although mindful that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972); Brown v.

Mpoy v. Fenty

870 F. Supp. 2d 173 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 2, 2012

See Bowden v. United States, 106 F.3d 433, 437 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (citing Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 13 (D.C. Cir. 1985)). … Supp. 2d at 204 (citing Brown v. Dist. of Columbia, 251 F. Supp. 2d 152, 165 (D.D.C. 2003)).

Edelman v. Securities and Exchange Commission

239 F. Supp. 3d 45 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 6, 2017

See Bd. of Trade v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 627 F.2d 392, 399–400 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (“Board of Trade”). … Dep’t of State v. Wash. Post Co., 456 U.S. 595, 620 (1982). That portion of the Board of Trade holding, accordingly, is no longer controlling.

Retail Clerks Union, Local 648 v. Retail Clerks International Ass'n

299 F. Supp. 1012 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 11, 1969

Thus, as was said in Wirtz v. … Given the wording of § 6(1) and § 33(E) it seems to the Court that the International Executive Board’s interpretation of the Union’s Constitution is reasonable and must be accepted under the doctrine of English v.

Parham v. Rettig

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 13, 2020

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). It is apparent that plaintiff’s complaint accomplishes none of these goals.

Hinton v. Shaw Pittman Potts & Trowbridge

257 F. Supp. 2d 96 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2003

See Brown v. Collins, 402 F.2d 209, 212-13 (D.C.Cir.1968) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 587). In Sturdivant v. … v.

Turner v. Department of Army

447 F. Supp. 1207 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 22, 1978

Turner v. Callaway, 371 F.Supp. 188, 192 (1974). … Tutt v. Dolby, 148 U.S.App.D.C. 171 , 459 F.2d 1195 (1972).

Adena Regional Medical Center v. Leavitt

524 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 11, 2007

Procedural History The Hospitals timely filed appeals of the fiscal intermediary’s determination to the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (the “Board”). See 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(a). … See Cabell Huntington Hosp., Inc. v. Shalala, 101 F.3d 984 , 988 (4th Cir.1996); Legacy .Emanuel Hosp. and Health Ctr. v. Shalala, 97 F.3d 1261, 1266 (9th Cir.1996); Deaconess Health Servs. Corp. v.

Terrell v. Bailey

District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2024

Atherton v. D.C. Off. of Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 682 (D.C. Cir. 2009). … at 3 (citing Brown v. WMATA, 164 F. Supp. 3d 33, 35 (D.D.C. 2016)). A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

Pratt v. Kerry

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 5, 2018

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). … Taylor v. Small, 350 F.3d 1286, 1293 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (quoting Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 457-58 (D.C. Cir. 1999)).

United States v. Mitchell

377 F. Supp. 1312 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 1974

See Baskin v. Brown, 174 F.2d 391, 394 (4th Cir. 1949). Bradley v. School Board, supra, 324 F.Supp. at 445 . … Edwards v. United States, supra, 334 F.2d at 362 n. 2. See also Kelley v. Metropolitan County Board of Education, 479 F.2d 810, 812 (6th Cir. 1973) (concurring opinion).

Hickman v. Alderson Court Transcripts Service for the Supreme Court

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 4, 2010

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Nonetheless, pro se plaintiffs 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).

Bradley Memorial Hospital v. Thompson

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 2, 2009

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo, the provider may file an appeal with the Provider Review Reimbursement Board (“the Board”). … Ctr. v.

Spadone v. McHugh

864 F. Supp. 2d 181 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 6, 2012

“Generally . . . issues and arguments not made before the relevant military correction board or administrative agency are deemed waived and could not be raised in a judicial tribunal.” Christian v. … failing the Cadet Physical Fitness Test because the Board ignored precedent that disallowed recoupment for failing that test); El Rio Santa Cruz Neighborhood Health Ctr., Inc. v.

Roberts v. District of Columbia Dept. of Corrections

855 F. Supp. 417 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 16, 1994

See, e.g., Hawkins v. Hall, 537 A.2d 571 (D.C.App.1988) (dismissing plaintiffs claim against employer Board of Education because of concurrent jurisdiction by Public Employee Relations Board). The U.S. … .”); Myers v.

Brunk v. British Airways PLC.

195 F. Supp. 2d 130 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 15, 2002

ANALYSIS Because Brunk sustained her injuries on board an international commercial flight, her claim is governed by the Warsaw Convention. 1 El Al Airlines, Ltd. v. … See Forman v. Small, 271 F.3d 285, 291 (D.C.Cir.2001).