Case law

Singletary v. District of Columbia

766 F.3d 66 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 2014

Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 407 (1997)) (alterations omitted). On cross motions for summary judgment, the district court granted partial summary judgment to Singletary on the question of liability. … Id.; see Brown v. District of Columbia, 514 F.3d 1279, 1283 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Warren v. District of Columbia,  10 353 F.3d 36, 39 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Brown & Bigelow, Paul W. Felt v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents

232 F.2d 41 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 29, 1955

Black-Clawson Co. v. Centrifugal Engineering & P. Corp., 6 Cir., 1936, 83 F.2d 116 , certiorari denied, 1936, 299 U.S. 554 , 57 S.Ct. 16 , 81 L.Ed. 408 . … Kistler v. Coe, 1944, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 36 , 142 F.2d 94 ; Application of Ashbaugh, 1949, 173 F.2d 273, 274 , 36 C.C.P.A., Patents, 902. Under the circumstances, there is no error in the judgment of the District Court.

Stephens v. US Airways Group, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 7, 2012

See id. at 442 n.1 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) (“Judge Brown’s opinion is the controlling opinion in this case because it presents the narrowest grounds of the opinions forming a majority.” (citing Marks v. … See Taylor v. D.C.

United Steelworkers of America v. National Labor Relations Board

646 F.2d 616 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 25, 1981

Just as that is a vital consideration in determining the validity of a no-solicitation rule, see Republic Aviation Corp. v. Labor Board, supra, at 797-798 [ 65 S.Ct. at 985 ]; Labor Board v. … Co. v.

Waremart Foods v. National Labor Relations Board

354 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 16, 2004

In the Board’s view, Lechmere, Inc. v. … Unless California law is what the Board says it is, this case is indistinguishable from Lechmere and the Board’s decision is in error. See ITT Industries, Inc. v. NLRB, 251 F.3d 995, 1000-03 (D.C.Cir.2001).

Association Of American Railroads v. Surface Transportation Board

162 F.3d 101 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

The Board is left to decipher which "employees [ ] may be affected thereby." 28 Under the ruling of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. … Workers v. ICC, 862 F.2d 330 (D.C.Cir.1988). The Board reiterated this proposition at oral argument.

California Air Resources Board v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 2020

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD, Plaintiff v. … See Landmark Legal Found. v. EPA, 272 F.

Precision Concrete v. National Labor Relations Board

362 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 2003

Galloway Co. v. NLRB, 856 F.2d 275, 279 (D.C. … In Drug Plastics, 30 F.3d at 172–73, we upheld the Board’s test pursuant to Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v.

Waremart Foods v. National Labor Relations Board

354 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 1, 2003

In the Board’s view, Lechmere, Inc. v. … Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 (1972),  4 and Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455 (1980).

Wisconsin Bankers Association v. Board of Governors of Federal Reserve System

589 F.2d 734 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 27, 1978

589 F.2d 734 191 U.S.App.D.C. 211 Wisconsin Bankers Association v. Board of Governors of Federal Reserve System No. 78-1083 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit 10/27/78 1 B.G.F.R.S. 2 REMANDED *

North of Market Senior Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

204 F.3d 1163 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 10, 2000

A The Integrity of the Election The Board attempts, as near as possible, to hold elections in a laboratory *1168 condition. See NLRB v. … Electrical Workers IUE v. NLRB, 67 L.R.R.M. 2361 (D.D.C.1968), acq. 171 N.L.R.B. 21 (1968), enf'd. NLRB v.

Brink's, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

466 F. Supp. 112 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 11, 1979

Defendant, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board), is a federal body also organized under the Federal Reserve Act and is charged with administering the nation’s monetary policy. 6. … As set forth in Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass’n v.

Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union v. National Labor Relations Board

547 F.2d 575 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 1976

The Board’s orders were granted enforcement in all respects by this court. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers v. … Perhaps more important, the Board failed to cite more recent authority in both this circuit, see Case v.

International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

383 F.2d 230 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 6, 1967

Stevens and Co. v. N. L. R. B., 380 F.2d 292 , decided July 7, 1967.) … B. v.

1731 NH Ave. Owner LLC v. DC Bd. of Zoning

201 A.3d 577 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 7, 2019

Post Tension of Nevada, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

331 F. App'x 3 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 4, 2009

The employer contends the Board’s findings are unsupported by substantial evidence. In accord with our “highly deferential” standard of review, Capital Cleaning Contractors, Inc., v. … relationship,” NLRB v.

Pacific Northwest Newspaper Guild, Local 82 v. National Labor Relations Board

877 F.2d 998 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 16, 1989

See NLRB v. Food Fair Stores, Inc., 307 F.2d 3, 14 (3d Cir.1962). The “membership” that can be required as a condition of employment is thus “whittled down to its financial core.” NLRB v. … Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837 , 104 S.Ct. 2778 , 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984), to a Board interpretation of ambiguous statutory language so long as its construction is “rational and consistent with the statute,” NLRB v.

Stephens v. US Airways Group, Inc.

908 F. Supp. 2d 10 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 7, 2012

See Taylor v. D.C. … See id. at 442 n. 1 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) ("Judge Brown's opinion is the controlling opinion in this case because it presents the narrowest grounds of the opinions forming a majority.” (citing Marks v.

Waremart Foods v. National Labor Relations Board

354 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 16, 2004

Unless California law is what the Board says it is, this case is indistinguishable from Lechmere and the Board’s decision is in error. See ITT Industries, Inc. v. NLRB, 251 F.3d 995, 1000–03 (D.C. Cir. 2001). … Brown, 447 U.S. 455 (1980), a state law prohibited but then ‘‘dismissed review’’ without deciding the case. See CALI- FORNIA RULES OF COURT § 976(d); Stephen R.

Bernard S. Brown and Aaron A. Paulson v. Walter N. Tobriner, Commissioners of the District of Columbia, 2501-03 Fourteenth Street Cooperative Association v. Walter N. Tobriner, Commissioners of the District of Columbia

312 F.2d 334 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 8, 1962

BROWN and Aaron A. Paulson, Appellants, v. Walter N. TOBRINER et al., Commissioners of the District of Columbia, Appellees. 2501-03 FOURTEENTH STREET COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, Appellant, v. Walter N. … Brown and Paulson, along with their wives and a third party, were its founders. Brown's wife and Paulson were its first President and Secretary, respectively.