Case law

Smith v. Police & Firemen's Retirement & Relief Board

460 A.2d 997 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 28, 1983

Neumann Properties, Inc. v. District of Columbia Board of Appeal and Review, 268 A.2d 605, 606 (D.C.1970). … See Great American Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Novotny, 442 U.S. 366 , 99 S.Ct. 2345 , 60 L.Ed.2d 957 (1979); Brown v. General Services Administration, 425 U.S. 820 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976).

Achagzai v. Broadcasting Board of Governors

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 8, 2016

Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 114 (2002). … carries the burden of proof, Bowden v.

Woody v. Police & Firemen's Retirement & Relief Board

441 A.2d 987 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 1982

Under our holding in Seabolt v. … See Rzepecki v. Police and Firemen’s Retirement and Relief Board, D.C.App., 429 A.2d 1388 (1981); Whitehurst v. Police and Firemen’s Retirement and Relief Board, D.C.App., 418 A.2d 1028 (1980).

American Federation of Government Employees v. Brown

866 F. Supp. 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 14, 1994

United States v. W.T. Grant Co., 345 U.S. 629, 632 , 73 S.Ct. 894, 897 , 97 L.Ed. 1303 (1953). … Committee in Solidarity v. Sessions, 929 F.2d 742, 745 (D.C.Cir.1991).

William H. Brown v. Betty Moxley Stevens

331 F.2d 803 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 9, 1964

Boone v. Boone, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 152, 154-155 , 150 F.2d 153, 155-156 (1945). … See Sampsell v. Superior Court, 32 Cal.2d 763 , 197 P.2d 739 (1948); Stansbury, Custody and Maintenance Law Across State Lines, 10 Law and Contemporary Problems 819, 830-831 (1944). 2 . Cf. Maher v.

Temporaries Inc. v. District Unemployment Compensation Board

304 A.2d 14 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 23, 1973

In Carmichael v. … Co. v. Blagg, 235 U.S. 571, 576 , 35 S.Ct. 167 , 59 L.Ed. 364 ; Middleton v. Texas Power & L.

Carbon v. Physical Therapists Examining Board

242 A.2d 835 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 1968

V), § 2-451(d). 7 . Hicks v. … V), § 2-451 (c); see Olsen v. District of Columbia Physical Therapists Examining Board, D.C.App., 227 A.2d 392 (1967). 9 . Schramm v. Physical Therapists Examining Board, supra note 5, 219 A.2d at 848. 10 . Id.

Eden v. Abrams

259 A.2d 351 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 1969

However, when Abrams later resold the property to Esther Eden, nominee for appellants Sidney J. and Sarah Brown (hereinafter Brown), the deed was absolute, with no mention made of Hedin’s reservation of a right of occupancy … Hampton v. Mott Motors, Inc., D.C. Mun.App., 32 A.2d 247, 248 (1943). . This is not a ease for double rent under D.C.Code 1967, § 45-907.

Creed v. National Transportation Safety Board

758 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 18, 2010

Chiron v. … City of Rochester v.

Davis v. U.S. Parole Board

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 9, 2010

Parole Board issued a warrant for his arrest, revoked his parole, and caused his return to custody until June 20, 2011. Id. … See, e.g., Epps v. Howes, No. 06-717(RMC), 2007 WL 2248072, at *3 (D.D.C.

Sheffield v. Board of Education

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 26, 2010

In Neitzke v. … Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).

Von Stauffenberg v. District Unemployment Compensation Board

269 A.2d 110 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 1970

Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 , 74 S. … Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, 584 , 57 S.Ct. 883 , 81 L.Ed. 1279 (1937); Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619, 646 , 57 S.Ct. 904 , 81 L.Ed. 1307 (1937). See also United States v.

Avila v. National Labor Relations Board

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 1, 2024

7, Inc. d/b/a Saint Vincent Hospital v. … Hanson v. D.C., 257 F.R.D. 19, 21 (D.D.C. 2009) (citing Stewart v. O’Neill, 225 F. Supp. 2d 16, 21 (D.D.C. 2002)).

Berl v. Board of Psychologist Examiners

322 A.2d 274 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 1974

NEBEKER, Associate Judge: Petitioner, conceded by respondent to be a “competent psychologist”, seeks reversal of an order of the Board of Psychologist Examiners (the Board) denying her a license to continue to practice that … Since a question of fundamental importance is now presented, and will no doubt be before the Board on remand and may arise on any subsequent review of the Board’s action respecting petitioner, we grant the motion to remand

Szego v. Police & Firefighters' Retirement & Relief Board

528 A.2d 1233 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1987

Scott v. Police and Firemen’s Retirement and Relief Board, 447 A.2d 447, 449 (D.C.1982). … Proulx v. Police and Firemen’s Retirement and Relief Board, 430 A.2d 34, 35 (D.C.1981).

Brown v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 2010

BROWN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action … Brown concedes that “OIP is an improper party to this action,” (Pl.’s Reply to Gov’t’s Opp.

Schmidt v. United States Capitol Police Board

826 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 28, 2011

v. … Cir. 2003); Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002); Schuler v. U.S., 617 F.2d 605, 608 (D.C.

Christopher Garvey v. Administrative Review Board

56 F.4th 110 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 23, 2022

Therefore, a court typically applies the terms of the APA when reviewing a Board order. See, e.g., Villanueva v. U.S. Dep’t of Lab., 743 F.3d 103, 108 (5th Cir. 2014); Welch v. … [This means that, a Board] decision must be upheld if, considering all the evidence, a reasonable person could have reached the same conclusion as the [Board].” Allen v. Admin. Rev.

Rzepecki v. Police & Firemen's Retirement & Relief Board

429 A.2d 1388 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 1981

This conclusion is supported by the expert medical testimony before the Board and by substantial evidence in the record considered as a whole. See D.C.Code 1973, § 1-1510(3)(E). … Accordingly, it is not our role to disturb the Board’s decision. Affirmed. Petitioner previously had sustained an ankle injury and originally sought disability retirement on that basis, which was denied.

Whitehurst v. Police & Firemen's Retirement & Relief Board

418 A.2d 1028 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 30, 1980

The Board found that petitioner’s heart condition-a “Wolf-Parkinson-White Syndrome”-was not aggravated by the performance of duty. This conclusion is supported by the expert medical testimony before the Board. … This case was decided by the Board prior to our decision in Seabolt v. Police and Firemen’s Retirement and Relief Board, D.C.App., 413 A.2d 908 (1980).