Case law

Tri State Maintenance Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

408 F.2d 171 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 18, 1968

See Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America v. NLRB, 112 U.S.App.D.C. 252 , 302 F.2d 186 (1962) ; Piasecki Aircraft Corp. v. … Phelps Dodge Corp. v. NLRB, 313 U.S. 177 , 61 S.Ct. 845 , 85 L.Ed. 1271 (1941) ; K. B. & J. Young’s Super Markets, Inc. v. NLRB, 377 F.2d 463 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 841 , 88 S.Ct. 71 , 19 L.Ed.2d 105 (1967).

United States v. Price

357 F. Supp. 2d 63 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 15, 2004

Brown was not a board certified pharmacist. … Detective Brown was subsequently charged and plead guilty to eight counts of perjury. As a part of his plea agreement, he admitted that he was not a board certified pharmacist. 2 . See, e.g., United States v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Arcade-Sunshine Co., Inc.

122 F.2d 964 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 23, 1941

Creekmore v. United States, 8 Cir., 237 F. 743 , L.R.A.1917C, 845. There is no reason for a different rule in cases instituted by the Board in the discharge of its duty to enforce the labor statute. Second. … Schwartz v. United States, 4 Cir., 217 F. 866 ; Fanning v. United States, 4 Cir., 72 F.2d 929 . We are of opinion, however, that paragraph 10 of the petition extends beyond the terms of the order, and should go out.

Exxel/atmos, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

37 F.3d 1538 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 4, 1994

Novato Healthcare Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

916 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 5, 2019

Spurlino Materials, LLC v. NLRB, 805 F.3d 1131, 1136 (D.C. Cir. 2015); Bally’s Park Place, Inc. v. NLRB, 646 F.3d 929, 935 (D.C. … NLRB v. Transp. Mgmt. Corp., 462 U.S. 393, 397-98 (1983); Metro. Edison Co. v. NLRB, 460 U.S. 693, 698 n.4 (1983); Tasty Baking Co. v. NLRB, 254 F.3d 114, 125 (D.C.

Roosevelt Brandon v. District of Columbia Board of Parole

734 F.2d 56 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 8, 1984

Compare Booth v. Hammock, 605 F.2d 661 (2d Cir.1979) (Greenholtz makes shall/unless formulation decisive) and Slocum v. Georgia State Board of Pardons & Paroles, 678 F.2d 940 (11th Cir.1982) (same) with Winsett v. … Anderson v.

12 Percent Logistics, Inc. v. Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board

280 F. Supp. 3d 118 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 1, 2017

(citing Davis v. Pension Benefit Guar. … Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61, 88 (1974) (quoting Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. Westover, 359 U.S. 500, 506–07 (1959)); see also Younger v.

Turner v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics

77 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 17, 1999

Grant *30 v. … Boos v.

2461 Corp. v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

950 A.2d 50 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 2008

This court reviews the factual findings of the Board with deference, reversing only if the findings are not based on substantial evidence in the record as a whole. See Levelle, Inc. v. … See Citizens Ass’n of Georgetown, Inc. v.

Air Line Pilots Association, International v. Civil Aeronautics Board

750 F.2d 81 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 30, 1984

In Abbott Laboratories, Inc. v. … PCHRG v. FDA, 740 F.2d 21 (D.C.Cir.1984); PCHRG v. Auchter, 702 F.2d 1150 (D.C.Cir.1983); PEPCO v. ICC, 702 F.2d 1026 , supp. op. 702 F.2d 1026 (D.C.Cir.1983); MCI Telecommunications Corp. v.

12 Percent Logistics, Inc. v. Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 9, 2020

USAO Matrix Rate Percentage Amount Awarded Total Requested Awarded Notice UCR Board $ 292.00 100% $292.00 Meeting Agenda, ECF No. 54 Resp. to Mot. $ 4,330.70 0% $0.00 Extension, ECF No. 57 Notice Fed.

Jameson's Liquors, Inc. v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

384 A.2d 412 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 1, 1978

Although we are not permitted to “substitute our judgment for that of the Board,” Schiffman v. Alcoholic Bev. Cont. … See Clore Restaurant v.

Citizens Against Rails-To-Trails v. Surface Transportation Board

267 F.3d 1144 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 26, 2001

Crisis, Inc. v. … In Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska v.

Dodge of Naperville, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

796 F.3d 31 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 4, 2015

Burke also contends that the Board’s decision in Brown Truck & Trailer Manufacturing Co., 106 N.L.R.B. 999 (1953), establishes that a historical union cannot bargain over the terms and conditions of unit employees at a new … According to the employer, the Board’s opinion is therefore invalid. See New Process Steel v. NLRB, 130 S.

Coronet Foods, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

981 F.2d 1284 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 3, 1993

See Zawatski v. Coronet Foods, Inc., No. 89-0042-W(K) (N.D.W.V, Dec. 27, 1989). … Coronet’s preclusion argument 4 fails for a most basic reason: the critical issue before the district court was not the same as the one ultimately before the Board. See Gould v.

Gaddis v. Dixie Realty Company

248 A.2d 820 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 8, 1969

v. … v.

Raymond L. Reese v. United States Board of Parole

498 F.2d 698 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 10, 1974

Young v. Director, U. S. … Under the rule laid down in Young v. Director, U.S. Bureau of Prisons, [ 125 U.S.App.D.C. 105 ] 367 F.2d 331 (C.A.

Vincent Industrial Plastics, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

209 F.3d 727 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 14, 2000

Printing Div. v. NLRB, 501 U.S. 190, 198 (1991); Grondorf, Field, Black & Co. v. NLRB, 107 F.3d 882, 886 (D.C. Cir. 1997). … The Board's judgment on this point was reasonable. Cf. Synergy Gas Corp. v. NLRB, 19 F.3d 649, 653 (D.C.

Szewczyk v. District of Columbia Police & Firefighters Retirement & Relief Board

633 A.2d 1 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 21, 1993

accept as adequate to support [the Board’s] conclusion,” Baumgartner v. … D.C.Code § 4-616(a) required the Board to determine whether petitioner’s fall caused his disability, either directly or by aggravating a prior job-related injury. E.g., Allen v.

Walls Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

321 F.2d 753 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 1963

See International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ U. v. N. L. R. B., 112 U.S.App.D.C. 30 , 299 F.2d 114 (1962). … This court, in remanding the ease to the Board, stated: “It will thus be seen that we agree with the Board’s conclusion that Mrs.