Case law

Suarez v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

140 F. Supp. 3d 94 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 27, 2015

See United States v. … DATE: October 27, 2015 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

United States v. Perkins

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 7, 2023

United States v. Charles Booker, 240 F. Supp. 3d 164, 170 (D.D.C. 2017); United States v. Brown, 249 F. Supp. 3d 287, 292-93 (D.D.C. 2017) (same). … United States v. McKie, 73 F.3d 1149, 1154 (D.C. Cir. 1996); accord Brown, 249 F. Supp. 3d at 293 (“The possibility that Mr. Brown’s sentence will be reduced by at least five years . . .

Hunter v. District of Columbia Child & Family Services Agency

710 F. Supp. 2d 152 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 11, 2010

Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C.Cir.1999). “[N]ot everything that makes an employee unhappy” is an adverse action under Title VII. Smart v. Ball State Univ., 89 F.3d 437, 441 (7th Cir.1996); accord Russell v. … Brown, 199 F.3d at 457 . The employment decision must inflict “objectively tangible harm.” Russell, 257 F.3d at 818 .

Middlebrooks v. Fuentes

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 11, 2010

See Brown v. District of Columbia, 514 F.3d 1279, 1283 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (“‘[A] document filed pro se is to be liberally construed.’”) (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)). … See, e.g., Little v. Trott & Trott, P.C., No. 09-1882, 2009 WL 4827441, at * 1 (D.D.C. Dec. 14, 2009) (dismissing complaint without prejudice where defendants had filed motion to dismiss).

N.E. Bridge Contractors, Inc. v. Aspen Aerials, Inc.

363 F. Supp. 3d 217 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 6, 2019

See Rafferty v. … v.

United States v. Jae Shik Kim

103 F. Supp. 3d 32 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 8, 2015

In Chimel v. … Id., quoting United States v. Fogelman, 586 F.2d 337, 350 (5th Cir. 1978) (Brown, C.J., concurring).

ltmc/dragonfly, Inc. v. Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority

699 F. Supp. 2d 281 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2010

See Def.’s Mem., Ex. 2 (Report to the MWAA Board of Directors). … Co. v. D.C.

Electro-Nucleonics, Inc. v. Mossinghoff

593 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 1984

See, e.g., Omark Industries v. Carlton Co., 652 F.2d 783, 786-87 (9th Cir.1980); Red Cross Mfg. Corp. v. … Cir.1983); Omark Industries v. Carlton Co., 652 F.2d at 787 ; Faulker v. Baldwin Piano & Organ Co., 561 F.2d at 684 n. 10.

Grant v. Mnuchin

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2019

Where, as here, the Board granted a petition for review of the Administrative Judge’s decision, the Board’s decision constitutes the Final Agency Decision. See White v. Tapella, 876 F. … The Board affirmed this finding.

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Peters

309 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 24, 2004

obliged to defer to the Board’s discretion and authority. … (“Given the Board’s record of inconsistent application of the filing deadline, we find the decision of the Board here puzzling,to the point of arbitrariness.”).

United States v. Hubbard

493 F. Supp. 202 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 1979

See Bursey v. United States, 466 F.2d 1059, 1083 (9th Cir. 1972); Brown v. Commonwealth, 214 Va. 755 , 204 S.E.2d 429 (Va.1974); State v. St. Peter, 315 A.2d 254, 256 (Vt.1972); Zelenka v. … Lovell v. City of Griffin, 303 U.S. 444, 452 , 58 S.Ct. 666, 669 , 82 L.Ed. 949 (1938). Finally, the defendants contend that the proceedings in New York Times v.

American Petroleum Tankers Parent, LLC v. United States

943 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 6, 2013

Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala, 244 F.3d 342, 348 (4th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted) (finding regulation providing that the Provider Reimbursement Review Board “may dismiss” an appeal was reviewable); cf. … Mulloy v. United States, 398 U.S. 410, 415 (1970) (“Though the language of 32 CFR § 1625.2 is permissive, it does not follow that a board may arbitrarily refuse to reopen a registrant’s classification.”).

Hylton v. Watt

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 13, 2018

Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp. Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 150 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (quoting Atherton v. D.C. Office of Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 681 (D.C. Cir. 2009)). … Brown, 789 F.3d at 152.

United States v. Bill Harbert International Construction, Inc.

601 F. Supp. 2d 45 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 2009

See Mitchell v. AMTRAK, 217 F.R.D. 53, 59 (D.D.C.2003). … See Cobell v. Norton, 407 F.

Powell v. Gray

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2013

PoWELL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v ) Civil Action No. _ ! … "Under the CMPA, an employee must first bring a grievance to the District of Columbia Public Employee Relations Board (‘PERB’)," and "[o]nly after a final order of the PERB has been issued can the plaintiff seek judicial

United States v. Fields

733 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 23, 1990

The defendant boarded the bus in Connecticut or New York, was travelling alone and, was travelling to a destination in North Carolina. … See United States v. Savage, 889 F.2d 1113 (D.C.Cir.1989); United States v. Baskin, 886 F.2d 383 (D.C.Cir.1989); United States v. Brady, 842 F.2d 1313 (D.C.Cir.1988).

Gregory v. United States General Services Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 2013

Citing Kloeckner v. Solis, l33 S.Ct. 596 (2012), plaintiff claims that jurisdiction lies in this court because the Merit Systems Protection Board ("MSPB") denied his "mixed case appeal." Compl. at 8-l l. … Fornaro v. Jarnes, 416 F.3d 63, 66 (D.C. Cir. 2005).

Scott v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 19, 2009

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). “[A] complaint needs some information about the circumstances giving rise to the claims.” Aktieselskabet Af 21. Nov. 2001 v. … Browning, 292 F.3d at 242. The accuracy of Captain Scott’s time entries is not a matter of public concern.

Aikens v. District of Columbia

950 F. Supp. 2d 186 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 21, 2013

Concerned Parents v. New York City Board of Education, 629 F.2d 751, 756 (2d. … District of Columbia Board of Education, 745 F.2d 1577, 1582 (D.C. Cir. 1984), recognized that “[t]he leading precedent on what type of change constitutes a change in educational placement is Concerned Parents v.

Washington, Marlboro & Annapolis Motor Lines, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission

114 F. Supp. 321 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 13, 1950

Co. v. … Federal Communications Commission v. Sanders, 1940, 309 U.S. 470, 642 , 60 S.Ct. 693 , 84 L.Ed. 869, 1037 , referred to by the Supreme Court in its opinion in Civil Aeronautics Bd. v.