Case law

Kuo-Yun Tao v. Sessions

808 F. Supp. 24 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 3, 1992

Thomas v. Board of Examiners, Chicago Public Schools, 866 F.2d 225, 227 (7th Cir.1988) (per curiam) (citing Clark v. … Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, 566 , 88 S.Ct. 1731, 1733 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968); Hall v. Ford, 856 F.2d at 257 , suspension or other disciplinary action, see, e.g., Murray v.

Said v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation

191 F. Supp. 3d 55 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 9, 2016

Vaca v. … (emphasis added)); Pyles v.

Kuznarowis v. Tobey Hosp.

320 F. Supp. 3d 307 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2018

Mangini prepared a complaint against Kuznarowis which a Southcoast HR manager filed with the Board of Registration in Nursing ("BORN") in December, 2014. … Legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason Plaintiff declares that "Tobey's complaint to the Board is the only reason it can use for firing Lee."

United States v. Russell

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 12, 2011

Unitea' States v. Turner ___ F. Supp. 2d 4 2011 WL 5865490, at *5 (D.D.C. Nov. 21, 2011); accord United States v. … Brown, 653 F.3d 337, 340 n.l (4th Cir. 2011). 2 applicable sentencing range unaffected by the amendment.

Crooker v. Central Intelligence Agency

577 F. Supp. 1225 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 13, 1984

Hedley v. United States, 594 F.2d 1043, 1044 (5th Cir.1979); see also Morpurgo v. … in dismissal”); Satra Belarus, Inc. v.

Tin v. Credit Agricole Cib-Chicago

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 28, 2025

See Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). … Jones v. Kirchner, 835 F.3d 74, 79 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (citation omitted).

Riss & Company v. Association of American Railroads

170 F. Supp. 354 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 16, 1959

v. … However, in the view of the Court of Appeals, the decision of the Supreme Court in Federal Maritime Board v.

In Re: Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation - Mdl 1869

District Court, District of Columbia · May 20, 2016

United States v. Brown, 415 F.3d 1257, 1269 (11th Cir. 2005); see also Jacobsen v. Oliver, No. 01-1810, 2007 WL 5527513, at *1 (D.D.C. Nov. 2, 2007); F.T.C. v. … Honda Motor Co. v. Allen, 600 F.3d 813, 815 (7th Cir. 2010))).

Long v. Gaines

167 F. Supp. 2d 75 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2001

Board of Parole with new parole regulations. … Board of Parole, many of the problems continue.

Schaefer v. Geren

607 F. Supp. 2d 61 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 23, 2009

Due to the physical deterioration of his knees, plaintiffs physician referred him to an administrative screening board, known as a Medical/MSO Retention Board (“MMRB”), for evaluation of his ability to perform the physical … Kreis v. Sec’y of the Air Force, 866 F.2d 1508, 1511 (D.C.Cir.1989). Indeed, “the function of [the Court] is not to serve as a super correction board that reweighs the evidence.” Charette v.

Nichols v. Truscott

424 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2006

See Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d at 457 ; Lloyd v. Ashcroft, Civil No. 97-1287, Slip Op. at 6 (D.D.C. July 17, 2001). … See Hussain v. Nicholson, 435 F.3d at 366 (citing Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d at 452 ).

Jicarilla Apache Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 31, 2009

Merit appealed this decision to the Interior Board of Land Appeals ("IBLA"), which reversed the ALJ on the jurisdictional question and remanded the case for further proceedings. … See, e.g., Browning v.

Western Center on Law & Poverty, Inc. v. Legal Services Corp.

592 F. Supp. 338 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 1, 1984

The Board approved the report at a 1981 meeting, id. … FEC v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, 454 U.S. at 37 , 102 S.Ct. at 44 .

Adams v. Dole

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2020

See Ashcroft v. … See Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Williams, 62 F.3d 408, 415 (D.C. Cir. 1995); cf.

Washington Hospital Center Corp. v. Heckler

598 F. Supp. 308 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 1984

The plaintiff appealed the intermediary’s adjustments to the Provider Reimbursement Review Board. The Board upheld the intermediary’s decision as “correct” and “reasonable.” (Administrative Record at 28). … Mary of Nazareth Hospital Center, et al. v. Schweiker, 718 F.2d 459 , 471 (D.C.Cir.1983).

Union Trust Co. of District of Columbia v. United States

113 F. Supp. 80 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 5, 1953

See: Jackson v. State of New York, 1933, 261 N.Y. 134 , 184 N.E. 735 ; Bloom v. Jewish Board of Guardians, 1941, 286 N.Y. 349 , 36 N.E.2d 617 ; Foley v. … State of New York, 1945, 294 N.Y. 275 , 62 N.E.2d 69 , citing Jackson v. State of New York and Bloom v. Jewish Board of Guardians, supra. Moch Co. v.

Levering v. Bank of Columbia

1 D.C. 207 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 15, 1804

said ship and prepare her to receive a cargo as soon as the said owners should be able to procure a freight for her, and that he was thereby to receive for his wages one dollar a day and be found, while he continued on board … See Ramsay v. Allegre, 12 Wheaton, 611 , Judge Johnson’s opinion, and Clinton v. Brig Hannah, Bee, 419 ; Shrewsbury v. Sloop Two Friends, Bee, 435; Bridgman's case, Hobart, 11; Justin v. Ballam, 2 Ld. Raymond, 805.

Ford v. Mitchell

890 F. Supp. 2d 24 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 10, 2012

Wagshal v. Foster, 28 F.3d 1249, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (collecting cases). Indeed, courts have held that quasi-judicial absolute immunity applies to members of a parole board and to parole officers. See Pate v. … Parole Board were entitled to absolute immunity against the claim that they violated the parolee’s constitutional rights when they failed to provide him with a timely parole revocation hearing); see also Reynolds El v.

United States v. Thomas

574 F. Supp. 197 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 28, 1983

The Supreme Court established in Baldwin v. … Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506 , 31 S.Ct. 480 , 55 L.Ed. 563 (1911); see also United States v. Brown, 552 F.2d 817 , 823 n. 8 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 949 , 97 S.Ct. 2666 , 53 L.Ed.2d 266 (1977).

Labofish v. Berman

55 F.2d 1022 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 18, 1932

Code 1929, tit. 20, § 991), it validated the ordinances of the Board of Health of the District of Columbia, and by Act August 7, 1894, 28 Stat. 257 (D. C. … See Hamer v. Globe Co., 243 Ill. App. 109, 117 ; Hennessy v. Metropolitan Co., 74 Conn. 699 ) 52 A. 490 ; McKinstry v. Collins, 74 Vt. 147 , 52 A. 438 ; State v.