Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. Brown

310 F.2d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 14, 1962

For example, Garner, President of the Association, was designated by the Board as “head” shipping clerk of Brown Wholesale. … Wayside Press, Inc. v. N. L. R. B., supra note 7, at 806.

Harring v. Commonwealth

70 Pa. Commw. 173 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 1982

Therefore, under our rule in Walker v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Re *176 view, 27 Pa. … Compare, Calorie Corp. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 70 Pa.

Myers v. State

395 Md. 261 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 24, 2006

In Brown v. … Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). 17 . See Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. at 605 n. 12, 95 S.Ct. at 2262 n. 12, 45 L.Ed.2d at 416 n. 12; U.S. v.

Brown v. Brown

213 Ark. 58 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 15, 1948

Brown did not have his glasses. Mrs. Brown handed Mr. Brown his glasses. Witness read the deed to Mr. Brown several times as he did not understand the habendum clause. … Brown sign the deed, but did not hear him give any instructions about it. It is essential to the valadity of a deed not only that it be executed, but it is required also that it be delivered. In the case of Cleveland v.

Huhta v. State Board of Medicine

706 A.2d 1275 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 1998

Cassella v. State Board of Medicine, Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs, 119 Pa.Cmwlth. 394 , 547 A2d 506, 512 (1988). … Slawek v. State Board of Medical Education and Licensure, 526 Pa. 316 , 586 A.2d 362 (1991). 3 . 63 P.S. § 422.41(8). 4 . 63 P.S. § 422.41(6). 5 .

Indiana State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Brown

78 Ind. Dec. 766 · Indiana Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 1980

NLRB v. Donnelly Garment Co., (1947) 330 U.S. 219 , 67 S.Ct. 756 , 91 L.Ed. 854 . We see no decisive distinction in the case at hand. Judgment reversed. NEAL and RATLIFF, JJ., concur. . … The board shall base its final decision on the report, any additional evidence taken by the board, and any records that the board considers relevant. .

Mangum v. Mississippi Parole Board

76 So. 3d 762 · Court of Appeals of Mississippi · Nov 29, 2011

Mangum alleged that he was discriminated against by the Mississippi Parole Board (“Board”) because of his race. … Lewis v. Delta Loans, Inc., 300 So.2d 142, 144-45 (Miss.1974) (citing Testa v.

Brown v. Brown (In re Brown)

7 B.R. 268 · District Court, D. New York · Dec 3, 1980

, be and the same remain vested in the plaintiff, DEBORAH BROWN and that defendant will pay $40.00 per week for the support of said infant, and it is further. … Brown, to the First National Bank of Wayland fails both tests because first it is not payable to the wife and/or child of the debtor and secondly it is not in the nature of alimony.

Brown, D. v. Brown, P.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2021

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT DIANA BROWN, : No. 645 MAL 2020 : Respondent … Respondent : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court v

Walls v. United States

582 F.3d 1358 · Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Sep 29, 2009

Brown v. United States, 184 Ct.Cl. 501 , 396 F.2d 989, 991 (1968); see also Beckham v. United States, 179 Ct.Cl. 539 , 375 F.2d 782, 785 (1967). … After our decision in Brown, it has become well established that judicial review of decisions of military correction boards is conducted under the APA. 11 Also after Brown, the Supreme Court has established that review under

Commonwealth v. Dobrolenski

460 Pa. 630 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 1975

Commonwealth v. … In the words of Justice Frankfurter, writing for the United States Supreme Court in Brown v.

Brown v. Brown

123 Cal. App. 283 · California Court of Appeal · May 2, 1932

Brown”; that “she never lived with him and never wants to live with him”; and many other statements are contained in the transcript in support of the complaint which, if believed by the trial judge, were sufficient proof … Bank of Findlay v. Terry, 103 Cal. App. 501 [ 285 Pac. 336 ] ; Greenzweig v. Strelinger, 103 Cal. 278 [ 37 Pac. 398 ] ; Smith v. Moore Mill & Lumber Co., 101 Cal.

Rivera v. BROWN & BROWN

41 So. 3d 897 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 3, 2010

41 So.3d 897 (2010) RIVERA v. BROWN & BROWN. No. 1D09-4663. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. August 3, 2010. Decision Without Published Opinion Affirmed.

Brown v. Brown

10 Fla. L. Weekly 1963 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 14, 1985

Brown v. Brown

68 Ala. 114 · Supreme Court of Alabama · Dec 15, 1880

If the complainant, Clara Brown, have any interest or estate in the lands, their issues or profits, or any right to occupy them, which she has not forfeited, her remedy at law was adequate and complete. … Brown. This judgment to take effect as of July 16th, 1878, when this cause was submitted.

Borden v. Antonelli Coll.

304 F. Supp. 3d 678 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 29, 2018

See Russ v. … Brown v. VHS of Mich., Inc. , 545 Fed.Appx. 368 , 372 (6th Cir. 2013). Here, Ms. Borden did not respond to Defendants' argument regarding promissory estoppel.

Luchejko v. City of Hoboken

207 N.J. 191 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 2011

See Brown v. Saint Venantius Sch., 111 N.J. 325, 335 , 544 A.2d 842 (1988) (“[W]e acknowledge the well-settled principal that municipal ordinances do not create a tort duty, as a matter of law.”); Lodato v. … State v. Brown, 190 N.J. 144, 157 , 919 A.2d 107 (2007) (quoting Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428, 443 , 120 S.Ct. 2326, 2336 , 147 L.Ed.2d 405, 419 (2000)); see also Flomerfelt v.

Brown v. Brown

134 F.2d 505 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 21, 1942

Bussius v. Bussius, D.C.1941, 38 F.Supp. 871 . The entire procedure is a consent procedure. Cf. Mahoney v.

Tequila Cuadra S. de RL de CV v. Manufacturera de Botas Cuadra, S.A. de C.V.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · May 8, 2025

Citations to the appeal record are to TTABVUE, the Board’s online docketing system. See, e.g., Turdin v. Trilobite, Ltd., Conc. No. 94002505, 2014 TTAB LEXIS 17, at *6 n.6 (TTAB 2014). … Berger, 787 F.3d at 1377 (“[V]iewing the evidence as a whole, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s conclusion.”).

Parham v. West

13 Vet. App. 59 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Sep 28, 1999

Thurber v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 119, 123 (1993); see also Zimick v. … Brown, 7 Vet.App. 271, 274 (1994) (noting that RO “must provide ... notification to the appellant of his or her procedural due process and appellate rights” (citing, inter alia, 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103 , 19.25)); Hauck v.