Case law

Rail-Term Corp. v. Surface Transportation Board

654 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 8, 2015

Petitioner has not shown that the Surface Transportation Board reopened proceedings and issued a new and final order. See Am. Ass’n of Paging Carriers v. FCC, 442 F.3d 751, 756 (D.C. … See ICC v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 482 U.S. 270, 278 , 107 S.Ct. 2360 , 96 L.Ed.2d 222 (1987).

In re Brown

649 A.2d 835 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 1994

In re Brown, 617 A.2d 194 (D.C.1992). … Upon such notification, the Board shall appoint a member of the District of Columbia Bar to monitor petitioner’s practice for a period of six months.

Serramonte Oldsmobile, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

86 F.3d 227 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 18, 1996

Bonanno Linen Serv., Inc. v. … Although we generally defer to the Board’s expertise in evaluating the nuances of the bargaining process, see Teamsters Local Union No. 639 v.

Le Jimmy, Inc. v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

433 A.2d 1090 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 22, 1981

Vestry of Grace Parish v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, D.C.App., 366 A.2d 1110, 1115 (1976); Citizens Association of Georgetown, Inc. v. … See Citizens Association of Georgetown v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, supra, 410 A.2d at 201 .

Waterbury Hotel Management, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board

314 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 14, 2003

Labor Relations Board Scott V. … See Saks & Co. v.

Marlin v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics

236 F.3d 716 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 19, 2001

Ass'n, 460 U.S. at 45 (citing Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455, 461 (1980)). … Ass'n, 460 U.S. at 45 (citing Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455, 461 (1980)).

International Woodworkers of America v. National Labor Relations Board

263 F.2d 483 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 29, 1959

B. v. F. W. … B. v. P. W. Woolworth Co., supra.

National Labor Relations Board v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

952 F.2d 523 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 7, 1992

Cook Paint & Varnish Co. v. … Workers v.

National Labor Relations Board v. St. Barnabas Hospital

46 F. App'x 32 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 17, 2002

The National Labor Relations Board (Members Wilma B. Liebman, John C. Truesdale, and Dennis P. Walsh) adopted the findings and order of the ALJ. St. Barnabas Hospital v. … NLRB v. GAIU Local 13-B, 682 F.2d 304, 311 (2d Cir. 1982). The Board has adopted regulations requiring parties to set forth their exceptions in detail. 29 C.F.R. § 102.46 (b).

United States v. Nunzio

430 A.2d 1372 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 14, 1981

We long have adhered to that view. 4 Brown v. United States, D.C.App., 411 A.2d 631, 633 (1980); McDaniels v. United States, D.C.App., 385 A.2d 180, 182 (1978); see Franklin v. … United States v. Addonizio, supra, 442 U.S. at 188-89 , 99 S.Ct. at 2242 ; Brown v. United States, supra, 411 A.2d at 632 ; Walden v. United States, D.C.App., 366 A.2d 1075, 1077 (1976); Burrell v.

International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers v. National Mediation Board

374 F. Supp. 2d 135 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 20, 2005

Board Member’s Inaction on IAM’s Request for Proffer The plaintiff also contends that defendant Board Member Fitzmaurice’s lack of vote on the IAM proffer request “prevents the Board from acting” and is further proof of the … Co. v.

Fashion Valley Mall, LLC. v. National Labor Relations Board

451 F.3d 241 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 16, 2006

We enforce a Board order if the factual findings upon which it rests are supported by “substantial evidence,” see United States Testing Co. v. … When the Board has occasion to interpret state law, however, our review is ordinarily de novo. See Cellwave Tel. Servs. L.P. v.

Venetian Casino Resort, L.L.C. v. National Labor Relations Board

484 F.3d 601 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 8, 2007

. § 157. 4 In Eastex, Inc. v. … Tasty Baking Co. v. NLRB, 254 F.3d 114, 124 (D.C. Cir. 2001). We afford the Board deference in making this determination “recogniz[ing] the Board’s competence in the first instance to judge the impact of utterances.”

International Organization of Masters v. National Labor Relations Board

486 F.2d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 4, 1973

National Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass’n v. NLRB, 2 Cir., 274 F.2d 167, 173 (1960). … See National Marine Engineers Beneficial Assn v. NLRB, 2 Cir., 274 F.2d 167 (1960).

Artis v. Greenspan

223 F. Supp. 2d 149 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2002

Judge Brown’s order stated that the complainants could not directly appeal to the Commission from her decision. … See, e.g., Brown v. General Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 832 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976). Failure to exhaust administrative remedies deprives a district court of subject matter jurisdiction.

Leon A. York v. Merit Systems Protection Board

711 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 19, 1983

MacKINNON, Senior Circuit Judge, dissenting: In my opinion the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board dismissing Petitioner from his employment with the Postal Service should be affirmed. … In my view we would be justified in concluding that on reconsideration the Board reviewed the considerations it had considered in the first instance and concluded that they were in error.

ABM Onsite Services-West, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

849 F.3d 1137 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 7, 2017

Trainmen v. … Because an agency’s unexplained departure from precedent is arbitrary and capricious, we must vacate the Board’s order. Comcast Corp. v. FCC, 526 F.3d 763, 769 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (citing Pontchartrain Broad. Co. v.

North American Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

241 F.2d 445 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 17, 1957

Accordingly, no useful purpose would be served by our reviewing the Board’s finding in regard to “willingness”. Cf. Kuhn v. … North American Airlines, Inc., v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 55 , 237 F.2d 209 , decided September 13, 1956.

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

584 F.2d 558 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 25, 1978

584 F.2d 558 189 U.S.App.D.C. 400 Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board No. 77-1798 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit 9/25/78 1 C.A.B. 2 AFFIRMED *

Greater Peoria Airport Authority v. Civil Aeronautics Board

543 F.2d 1389 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 9, 1976

543 F.2d 1389 178 U.S.App.D.C. 76 Greater Peoria Airport Authority v. Civil Aeronautics Board No. 75-1643 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit 11/9/76 1 C.A.B. AFFIRMED