Case law

Industrial Waxes, Inc. v. Brown

160 F. Supp. 230 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 22, 1957

Badhwar v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Corp., 2 Cir., 1957, 245 F.2d 903 ; Standard Casing Co. v. California Casing Co., 233 N.Y. 413 , 135 N.E. 834 ; Pottash v. … Cf., Harper v. Hochstim, 2 Cir., 278 F. 102 ; Hooper v. Robinson, *235 98 U.S. 528 , 25 L.Ed. 219 ; Cerro De Pasco Copper Corp. v. Knut Knutsen, D.C., 94 F.Supp. 60 . 2.

Brown v. Apfel

990 F. Supp. 714 · District Court, S.D. Iowa · Jan 16, 1998

In Groeper v. … McCoy v. Schweiker, 683 F.2d 1138, 1147 (8th Cir.1982) (en banc); O’Leary v. Schweiker, 710 F.2d 1334, 1338 (8th Cir.1983); Soth v. Shalala, 827 F.Supp. 1415, 1417 (S.D.Iowa1993); Davis v.

Brown v. Pennsylvania Canal Co.

244 F. 980 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 1917

Accepting, as we do, the ruling of the state court (Rea v. Penn. … The view taken by the master is, we think, unaffected by the comments quoted by defendant from Hobbs v. McLean, 117 U. S. 567 , 6 Sup. Ct. 870, 29 L. Ed. 940 , or Trustees v. Greenough, 105 U. S. 527 , 26 L.

Brown v. Nester

753 F. Supp. 630 · District Court, S.D. Mississippi · Nov 28, 1990

In Farrish v. … Furthermore, Brown does not challenge the impartiality of the hearing officer at the initial hearing, or the State Parole Board at the subsequent formal hearing.

Brown v. Supreme Court of Virginia

359 F. Supp. 549 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jun 5, 1973

Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353 U.S. 232 , 77 S.Ct. 752 , 1 L.Ed.2d 796 (1957); Konigsberg v. State Bar, 353 U.S. 252 , 77 S.Ct. 722 , 1 L.Ed.2d 810 (1957); Douglas v. … Phelps v. Board of Education, 300 U.S. 319, 324 , 57 S.Ct. 483 , 81 L.Ed. 674 (1937). .

FarmPro Services, Inc. v. Brown

276 B.R. 620 · District Court, D. North Dakota · Apr 22, 2002

Brown and Gayle Brown, have also appealed the September 3, 2001 judgment entered by the bankruptcy court. The Browns originally appealed this judgment to BAP. … Co. v. Maness, 101 F.3d 358, 363 (4th Cir.1996). Under the Bankruptcy Code, the term proceeds is to be used in its broadest sense. Id.

Stephens v. Brown & Root, Inc.

338 F. Supp. 680 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jun 21, 1971

It has its genesis when Brown & Root (Brown) sued O. R. Stephens and others (Civil Action No. 8166-A), alleging anti-trust violations. Brown & Root, Inc. v. Big Rock Corp., 383 F.2d 662 (5th Cir., 1967). … In Brooks v.

Brown v. Kelly & Picerne, Inc.

518 F. Supp. 730 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 6, 1981

This is a civil action brought by Harold Brown and Ronald Brown, as general partners of New England Realty Associates (NERA), a Massachusetts limited partnership against Kelly & Picerne, Inc. … Paradis v. Bancroft, 97 N.H. 477 , 91 A.2d 925 (1952).

Brown v. Commerce Trust Co.

9 F.R.D. 317 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Jul 30, 1949

Section 312(b) p. 880; Press v. Penny, 242 Mo. 98 , 145 S.W. 458 , 18 A.L.R. 794 . However, there are numerous and important exceptions to this general rule.

Brown v. United States

769 F. Supp. 2d 1355 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 15, 2011

Brown v. … Brown’s conscious choices. See Greenberg v.

Florida Key Deer v. Brown

364 F. Supp. 2d 1345 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 29, 2005

Greenpeace v. … Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v.

Brown v. Lowden

3 F.R.D. 173 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Dec 7, 1942

of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the accident arose from want of care.’ ” Atlas Powder Co. v. … Benson, 3 Cir., 287 F. 797, 798 ; San Juan Light & Transit Co. v. Requena, 224 U.S. 89 , 32 S.Ct. 399 , 56 L.Ed. 680 . The plaintiffs should not be required to specify what caused defendants’'!

In re Alleged Prohibited Political Activity Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority

443 F. Supp. 1194 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 1977

B. v. Costello, 296 F.Supp. 1035 (D.Conn.1968) (employer required to comply with Board subpoena in the course of a representation proceeding); United States v. … Feaster, 376 F.2d 147 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 389 U.S. 920 , 88 S.Ct. 237 , 19 L.Ed.2d 265 (1967) (National Mediation Board subpoena enforced against Alabama State Docks Department); Securities and Exchange Comm. v.

Brown v. County of Cook

549 F. Supp. 2d 1026 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 9, 2008

As Jennings v. … Much like the plaintiffs in Stachon and Richmond v.

Brown v. J.C. Penney Corp.

924 F. Supp. 1158 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 20, 1996

Brunswick Corp. v. Vineberg, 370 F.2d 605, 611-12 (5th Cir.1967). See Dalke v. Upjohn Co., 555 F.2d 245, 248-49 (9th Cir.1977). Clemons v. Dougherty County, 684 F.2d 1365, 1368-69 (11th Cir.1982); see also Amey, Inc. v. … Brown dep. at 147. 4 .

Brown v. Denver Post, Inc.

145 F. Supp. 351 · District Court, D. Colorado · Sep 13, 1956

In Huffman v. Norfolk & Western Ry. … In Altgens v.

Brown v. Curtin & Johnson, Inc.

117 F. Supp. 830 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 22, 1954

United States Electric Lighting Co. v. Sullivan, 22 App.D.C. 115 . *831 It is claimed by the plaintiff, however, that the case of Hitaffer v.

Brown v. Cassens Transport Co.

409 F. Supp. 2d 793 · District Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 15, 2005

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At all times relevant to the instant action, Paul Brown (“Brown”), William Fanaly (“Fanaly”), Charles Thomas (“Thomas”), Gary Riggs (“Riggs”), Robert Orlikowski (“OrlikowsM”), and Scott Way (“Way”) ( … Bender v.

Civil Aeronautics Board v. British Airways Board

433 F. Supp. 1379 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 10, 1977

Foreign Study League v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 475 F.2d 865, 870 (10th Cir. 1973). … A. v.

Totten v. Kellogg Brown & Root, LLC

152 F. Supp. 3d 1243 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 22, 2016

The Fifth Circuit disagreed with the Board’s finding that the class action waiver in the arbitration agreement violated the NLRA. See also Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. … Concrete Prods. v. General Truck Drivers, Office, Food & Warehouse Union, Local 952, 353 F.3d 668, 678 (9th Cir.2003) (sympathy strike to support workers engaged in primary strike); Brown & Root, Inc. v.