Case law

Deville- Nakdimen v. Ronald

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 13, 2022

P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (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).

Nails v. England

311 F. Supp. 2d 116 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2004

Jones v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 205 F.3d 428, 433 (D.C.Cir.2000); Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 453 (D.C.Cir.1999). … V.

Riedel v. Boston Heart Diagnostics Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 12, 2018

Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc., 800 F. … See Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., 800 F.

Autor v. Blank

128 F. Supp. 3d 331 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 14, 2015

Final Guidance on Appointment of Lobbyists to Federal Boards and Commissions, 76 Fed. Reg. 61756-01 (Oct. 5, 2011); Autor v. Pritzker, 740 F.3d 176, 179 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (“Autor II”). … However, the district court concluded that it was bound by Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v.

Doe v. District of Columbia

215 F. Supp. 3d 62 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 18, 2016

It’s on the bulletin board.”). … (citation omitted)); Velez v.

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. Dallas County

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 13, 2022

P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (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).

Owens v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 6, 2009

In August, plaintiff filed a petition seeking review of that dismissal by the Board of the OEA (“the Board”). (Id. ¶ 76.) … June 3, 1996) (concluding that plaintiff’s efforts to administratively exhaust claims through Merits Systems Protective Board tolled statute of limitations for Bivens claims under D.C. law); Pettaway v.

Henderson v. Ratner

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 30, 2009

Because Henderson still had not established that he had exhausted his available administrative remedies, a pre-requisite to the Board’s jurisdiction, the Board refused to entertain his case. Id., Ex. E. … The FSGB is an adjudicatory body whose members enjoy absolute immunity from damages suits in their personal capacity for the Board’s adjudications. See Butz v.

Chatterjee v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 10, 2025

Because the Court must “consider a pro se litigant’s complaint in light of all filings,” Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C. … See Bowman v. Iddon, 848 F.3d 1034, 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (citation omitted). That means, among other things, considering factual allegations from all his filings, not just his complaint. Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt.

United States v. Ali

885 F. Supp. 2d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 13, 2012

Ali boarded the CEC Future two days after it was taken by the pirates. … Id. at 23 (statement of Kavanaugh, J.); accord id. at 6–7 (statement of Brown, J.)

Dulcan v. Martin

64 F.R.D. 327 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 18, 1974

See Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. *330 583, 586 , 84 S.Ct. 1362 , 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964). In Reynolds v. … Justice Douglas, concurring in Baker v.

Richardson v. U.S. Department of Interior

740 F. Supp. 15 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 12, 1990

See Affidavit of Sharon Brown, ¶ 4; Affidavit of Officer DeLullo, II4. … Sharon Brown. Ms. Brown states that the officer simply told the plaintiff that he would have to "go around." 3 .

Dorns v. Geithner

692 F. Supp. 2d 119 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2010

Stewart v. Evans, 275 F.3d 1126, 1135 (D.C.Cir.2002) (citing Brown, 199 F.3d at 457 ). … Brown, 199 F.3d at 458 .

Antrum v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

710 F. Supp. 2d 112 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 10, 2010

Stella v. Mineta, 284 F.3d 135, 145 (D.C.Cir.2002) (quoting Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C.Cir.1999)). … As this Circuit observed in Brown v. D.C.

United States v. Contee

170 F. Supp. 26 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 10, 1959

Steele v. … E., Apartment “A”, carrying a large brown (sometimes white) paper bag. The Court is of the opinion that there was probable cause to believe 810 C Street, N.

Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co. v. Saxon

211 F. Supp. 576 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 5, 1962

Commercial State Bank of Roseville v. Gidney, D.C., 174 F.Supp. 770, 778 , aff’d, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 37 , 278 F.2d 871 (1960); Camden Trust Co. v. … Relying on the authority of Braeburn Securities Corp. v.

Regan v. Grill Concepts-D.C., Inc.

338 F. Supp. 2d 131 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 5, 2004

Hicks, 509 U.S. at 507-08 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 ; Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d at 458 . III. ANALYSIS A. … See Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446 (D.C.Cir.1999) citing Doe v. Dekalb County School Dist., 145 F.3d 1441 (11th Cir.1998).

Carter, Fullerton & Hayes, Lcc v. Federal Trade Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 2009

Nat’l Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 437 U.S. 214, 224 (1978). … New Motor Vehicle Dealer Board of Cal. v. Orrin W. Fox Co., 439 U.S. 96, 111 (1978).

Lafayette-South Side Bank v. Commissioner

33 F.2d 646 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 1929

Baker & Taylor Co. v. United States (C. C. A.) 26 F.(2d) 187 . Furthermore, it would have been unlawful for the new bank to issue stock in payment of the good will of the old banks. … Baker & Taylor Co. v. United States (D. C.) 21 F.(2d) 787 , 789. The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed, with costs.