Case law

ST. ANTHONY'S HEALTH CENTER v. Leavitt

579 F. Supp. 2d 115 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2008

The plaintiff appealed that decision to the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (“PRRB” or “the Board”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(a) and 42 C.F.R. § 405.1835 . J.A. at 26-40. … Univ. v.

Turner v. District of Columbia

383 F. Supp. 2d 157 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 25, 2005

Pl.’s Opp’n at 16 (quoting Cornwell v. Robinson, 23 F.3d 694, 703 (2d Cir.1994), and relying on Hull v. Cuyahoga Valley Board of Education, 926 F.2d 505, 511 (6th Cir.1991)). … Stewart v. Evans, 275 F.3d 1126, 1134 (D.C.Cir.2002) (quoting Brown, 199 F.3d at 457 ).

Watkins v. Heastie-Graham

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 19, 2026

Evans v. Suter, No. 09–5242, 2010 WL 1632902, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 2, 2010); see also Hurt v. U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Cir., 264 F.App’x. 1, 1 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Scholastic Ent., Inc. v. Fox Ent. … See Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977) (explaining that the purpose of Rule 8 is to give defendants fair notice of a plaintiff’s claims so they made properly respond).

Miller v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 7, 2020

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

Cromeartie v. Rcm of Washington, Inc.

118 F. Supp. 3d 335 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2015

P. 8(a)(2); accord Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (per curiam). A motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) “tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.” Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. … See Brown v. Sessoms, 774 F.3d 1016, 1022 (D.C. Cir. 2014), quoting Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v.

Williams v. Turner Services Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2021

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Corp. v.

Lynch v. Daro Realty LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 30, 2020

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).

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Export-Import Bank of the United States

85 F. Supp. 3d 250 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2015

The Bank Act also contains several provisions requiring the Bank and its Board of Directors (“Board”) to take into account potential serious adverse effects on U.S. industry and employment when considering a proposed transaction … Civil Aeronautics Board, 522 F.2d 107 (D.C. Cir. 1974). There, the D.C.

Local 300, National Postal Mail Handlers Union v. National Postal Mail Handlers Union

764 F. Supp. 199 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 1991

National Executive Board in a timely fashion prior to ratification. … Such a claim of refusal to bargain in good faith falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board. See, e.g., Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 178 , 87 S.Ct. 903, 910 , 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967).

Traczyk v. Levitan

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 5, 2021

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).

Gonzalez Ramos v. Adr Vantage, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 26, 2020

Archive v. CIA, 752 F.3d 460, 463–65 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (exempting draft of CIA history); Arthur Andersen & Co. v. IRS, 679 F.2d 254, 255 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (exempting draft revenue ruling); Competitive Enter. Inst. v. … In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 756 F.3d 754, 760 (D.C. Cir. 2014). Here, USDA fails to make a “clear showing” as to what “legal advice” Masker provided to ADR Vantage.

United States v. Neill

952 F. Supp. 834 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 17, 1997

Agent Brown, who was present when Fort discovered and sealed the document, 9 corroborated Fort’s testimony. See Transcript at 84-85 (Vol. II-B). … Under Weatherford v.

Cannon v. Charter Communications

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2018

See ECF Nos. 10 (Amended Complaint), 16 (Opposition); Brown v. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 151-52 (D.C. … (quoting Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 924 (2011)).

Jackson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

538 F. Supp. 2d 194 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 14, 2008

Board of Parole. Id. … That decision was affirmed by the National Appeals Board on August 29, 2005. Id. Ex. 28.

United States v. Alsbrook

336 F. Supp. 973 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 23, 1971

Board of Parole to the District of Columbia Mayor-Commissioner. … Swann v. CharlotteMecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 , 91 S.Ct. 1267 , 28 L.Ed.2d 554 and Hobson v. Hansen, 269 F.Supp. 401 (D.D.C.1967), modified, Smuck v. Hobson, 132 U.S.App.D.C. 372 , 408 F.2d 175 (1969).

McKenzie v. Jefferson

566 F. Supp. 404 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 11, 1983

A related case, Intrator v. District of Columbia Board of Education, Civil No. 82-1204, was filed on April 30, 1982. … In Tatro v.

Jordan v. United States Department of Justice

89 F.R.D. 537 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 1981

See, e. g., Communist Party v. United States Department of Justice, No. 75-1770 (D.D.C.1976); Zeldin v. Hoffman, No. 75-1913 (D.D.C.1976); Public Citizen Health Research Group v. … Brown v. Stackler, 612 F.2d 1057, 1059 (7th Cir. 1980).

Perry v. Snowbarger

590 F. Supp. 2d 90 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 11, 2008

See Brady v. … Wiley, 569 F.2d 140, 141 (D.C.Cir.1977) (per curiam) (quoting Brown v. Gen. Serv. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 835 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976)). See also Cross v.

Salha v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 11, 2020

Watersheds Project v. Tidwell, 306 F. Supp. 3d 350, 356 (D.D.C. 2017). … Date: September 11, 2020 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

Ockleston v. Saul

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 18, 2020

STANDARD OF REVIEW The District Court must affirm an ALJ’s decision if it is supported by “substantial evidence” in the record. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2005); Brown v. Bowen, 794 F.2d 703, 705 (D.C. Cir. 1986). … Affum v. United States, 566 F.3d 1150, 1163 (D.C. Cir. 2009). This Court must engage in “careful scrutiny of the entire record.” Brown, 794 F.2d at 705.