Case law

Brown v. Department & Specialty Store Employees Union

187 F. Supp. 619 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 8, 1960

Brown, D.C., 187 P.Supp. 865). … Store) v. N. L. R. B., 9 Cir., 196 F.2d 411, 413 ; N. L. R. B. v. Townsend, 9 Cir„ 185 F.2d 378, 382 ; Brown v. Roofers, D.C.N.D.Cal., 86 F.Supp. 50, 54-55 ; N. L. R. B. v.

Florida Board of Business Regulation v. National Labor Relations Board

497 F. Supp. 599 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 30, 1980

Florida Board of Business Regulation v. N. L. R. B., 605 F.2d 916 (5th Cir. 1979). … Leedom v. Kyne and Fay v. Douds represent narrow exceptions to this rule.

Skehan v. Board of Trustees

501 F. Supp. 1360 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 1980

Skehan v. Board of Trustees of Bloomsburg State College, 590 F.2d 470, 496 (3d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 832 , 100 S.Ct. 61 , 62 L.Ed.2d 41 (1979). The Defendants, relying on Buxton v. … At the time this case was filed, the Supreme Court had decided Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972) and Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972).

Brown v. Children's National Medical Center

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2011

See Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … See Brown v. Sim, No. 03-2655, 2005 WL 3276190, at *4 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 2005); Elliott v. Healthcare Corp., 629 A.2d 6, 9 (D.C. 1993); see also Duncan v. Children’s Nat’l Med.

Cohen v. Brown Univ. et al.

2001 DNH 216 · District Court, D. New Hampshire · Dec 5, 2001

See Cohen v . Brown Univ., N.H. Civ. Action N o . 99-485-B, R.I. Civil Action N o . 92-197, at 79 (D.R.I. Aug. 1 0 , 2001) (“Report and Recommendation”). … See, e.g., Brown v . Gray, 227 F.3d 1278, 1297-98 (10th Cir. 2000); LeBlanc-Sternberg v . Fletcher, 143 F.3d 748, 763 (2d Cir. 1998); Abrams v . Lightolier Inc., 50 F.3d 1204, 1225-26 (3d Cir. 1995).

Dodson v. United States Capitol Police

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2022

Dodson gave Brown the January 19 note from his physician, but Brown requested that Dodson provide a note excusing him, specifically, for January 20 and 21. … If the Board approves the termination or fails to act on it within 30 days of receiving the Chief’s 17 notice, “the Board shall be deemed to have approved the termination

Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo

510 F. Supp. 793 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1981

On February 5, 1981, the Whitman Council, Inc., defendants in Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo, and the McQuilkens, plaintiffs in McQuilken v. … In Resident Advisory Board v.

Ainsworth v. Loudon County School Board

851 F. Supp. 2d 963 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 16, 2012

Other courts have rejected the argument that such "special rules” preclude individual liability under the FMLA in cases against public school boards and their employees. See, e.g., Fields v. … Johnson v. Hugo’s Skateway, 974 F.2d 1408 , 1416 n. 7 (4th Cir.1992); Brown v. Mitchell, 327 F.Supp.2d 615 , 628 n. 27 (E.D.Va.2004).

Lambert v. City of Onalaska, Texas

District Court, E.D. Texas · Jul 18, 2025

Terrell, 114 F.4th at 435 (quoting Brown v. Lyford, 243 F.3d 185, 190 (5th Cir. 2001)) (“There must not even arguably be probable cause for the search and arrest for immunity to be lost. … .”); Brown v. Wilkinson Cnty. Sheriff 4 The Mt. Healthy First Amendment retaliation framework is that adumbrated in the titular Mt. Healthy City Bd. of Ed. v.

Talley v. Brentwood Union Free School District

728 F. Supp. 2d 226 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 4, 2010

Herrmann v. … See, e.g., Brown v. City of Oneonta, New York, 221 F.3d 329, 341 (2d Cir.2000) (“[A] § 1986 claim must be predicated on a valid § 1985 claim....”); Daniel, 2009 WL 702209 , at *10.

Wynn v. Board of Education

815 F. Supp. 2d 1007 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 17, 2011

A school board, therefore, “must act within its statutory authority and has no inherent powers beyond those specifically granted.” Evans v. Benjamin Sch. Dist. … Board of Education v. Jackson, 401 Ill. App.3d 24 , 339 Ill.Dec. 665 , 927 N.E.2d 206 (Ill.App.Ct.2010), cited by Dr. Wynn, does not support the opposite conclusion.

Brown v. COLEGIO DE ABOGADOS DE PUERTO RICO

826 F. Supp. 2d 406 · District Court, D. Puerto Rico · May 24, 2011

Brown v. Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico, 613 F.3d 44, 49 (1st Cir.2010). On June 27, 2006, Herbert W. Brown III, José L. Ubarri, and David W. Roman (“Class Plaintiffs”) filed the instant action against Colegio. … To opt-out, class members had to mail and postmark a letter, on or before February 26, 2011, to the Brown v.

Brown v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2010

BACKGROUND The background of this case is discussed fully in Brown v. FBI, 675 F. Supp. 2d 122 (D.D.C. 2009). … Atchinson v. Dist. of Columbia, 73 F.3d 418, 425 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Williamsburg Wax Museum, Inc. v. 3 Brown also moves to supplement his motion for reconsideration and leave to amend.

King v. Pulaski County School Board

195 F. Supp. 3d 873 · District Court, W.D. Virginia · Jul 20, 2016

See Anderson v. … Once Brown confirmed with plaintiff that all of his complaints were accurately noted, Brown reviewed the relevant School Board policies. Brown then spoke to Spaulding, who denied the allegations that she and Mrs.

Bradley v. School Board of Richmond

324 F. Supp. 401 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Feb 10, 1971

Bell v. School Board of Powhatan County, 321 F.2d 494 (4th Cir. 1963). Moreover an award of nominal or exemplary damages in a § 1983 case is permissible. Tracy v. Robbins, 40 F.R.D. 108 (D.S.C. 1966). … Wall v. Stanley County Board of Education, 378 F.2d 275 (4th Cir. 1967).

Brown v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance

463 F. Supp. 435 · District Court, D. South Carolina · Nov 29, 1978

In 1938 the Supreme Court held in Erie Railroad Co. v. … In March of 1978 the Supreme Court of South Carolina decided the case of Smith v.

United States v. Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Co.

141 F. Supp. 520 · District Court, D. Rhode Island · Apr 2, 1956

United States v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 220 U.S. 257 , 31 S.Ct. 387 , 55 L.Ed. 458 ; Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. … Minneapolis Civic & Commerce Association, 247 U.S. 490 , 38 S.Ct. 553 , 62 L.Ed. 1229 ; United States v. Reading Co., 253 U.S. 26 , 40 S.Ct. 425 , 64 L.Ed. 760 ; Centmont Corporation v.

Bettencourt v. Social Security Board

66 F. Supp. 629 · District Court, N.D. California · May 15, 1946

This cause, submitted to the Court upon motions for summary judgment presented by both plaintiff and defendants, is analogous in its essential facts to the case of Burger et ux. v. … The decision of the Social Security Board is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Board with directions to recompute the benefits to which plaintiff is entitled under the Act. 42 U.S.C.A. § 405 (g).

Brown v. First Nat. Bank of Wewoka

14 F.R.D. 339 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 9, 1953

The true principle is stated in Williams v. Robinson: 3 *341 “Whether the subject matter of opposing claims is the same requires an examination into the basic facts underlying each of them. … The court in Hoosier Casualty Co. of Indianapolis, Ind. v.

Brown v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.

554 F. Supp. 1271 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1981

On June 22, 1981, this court entered an Opinion and Order granting the defendant, Caterpillar Tractor Company’s, motion for summary judgment in the case of Brown v. Caterpillar Tractor Company. … This companion order adopted this court’s opinion in Brown v. Caterpillar Tractor Company. The court held a hearing to reconsider its Opinion and Order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment on July 14, 1981.