Case law

Sheboygan County, a Municipal Corporation v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Manitowoc County, Intervenor

330 F.2d 232 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 12, 1964

It applied to the Civil Aeronautics Board for an order requiring scheduled air transportation to and from its airport, and made North Central a party to the proceeding. … The expert Board carefully spelled out the considerations which led to its conclusions. Its action has support in the record. Affirmed.

Western Addition Community Organization v. National Labor Relations Board, the Emporium Capwell Company, Interventor

485 F.2d 917 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 29, 1973

FOR YEARS AT THE EMPORIUM BLACK, BROWN, YELLOW, AND RED PEOPLE, HAVE WORKED AT THE LOWEST JOBS, AT THE LOWEST LEVELS. … B. v. Tanner Motor Livery, Ltd., 349 F.2d 1 (9th Cir. 1965). 45 For these reasons the decision and order of the Board are reversed and remanded to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

353 F.2d 852 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 4, 1965

National Labor Relations Board v. Erie Resistor Corp., 373 U.S. 221, 236 , 83 S.Ct. 1139 , 10 L.Ed.2d 308 (1963). … In National Labor Relations Board v.

Wood v. American Federation of Government Employees

255 F. Supp. 3d 190 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 15, 2017

See Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C. … Smith v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 3 F. Supp. 2d 1473, 1475 (D.D.C. 1998) (quoting Kuwait Airways Corp. v. American Security Bank, N.A., 890 F.2d 456, 463 n.11 (D.C.Cir.1989)).

James H. Neal v. District of Columbia and John Lattimore

131 F.3d 172 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 9, 1998

WALD, Circuit Judge: This is a companion case to Brown v. Plaut, 131 F.3d 163 (D.C.Cir.1997). … We find that, under the analysis mandated by Sandin v.

Retail Clerks International Association, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Montgomery Ward & Co., Incorporated, Intervenor. Montgomery Ward & Co., Incorporated v. National Labor Relations Board, Retail Clerks International Association, Afl-Cio, Intervenor

373 F.2d 655 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 6, 1967

Brown, Chicago, Ill., of the bar of the Supreme Court of Illinois, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Messrs. John W. Noble, Jr., Chicago, Ill., Frederick M. Rowe and Ronald J. … Grant Co. v. NLRB, 337 F.2d 447, 449 (7th Cir. 1964), the Board held that the mere request was a violation of the Act.

Road Sprinkler Fitters Local Union No. 669 v. National Labor Relations Board

600 F.2d 918 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 11, 1979

NLRB, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 115 , 362 F.2d 943, 945-46 (1966); see also Midwest Regional Joint Board v. NLRB, 183 U.S.App.D.C. 413 , 417, 564 F.2d 434 , 438 (1977). … No distinction exists between the effect of the Board’s theory and use of the waiver standard in this court’s earlier cases. In International Union, UAW v.

Emerson Emory v. Secretary of the Navy

819 F.2d 291 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 19, 1987

See, e.g., Orloff v. Willoughby, 345 U.S. 83, 93-94 , 73 S.Ct. 534, 539-40 , 97 L.Ed. 842 (1953); Reaves v. Ainsworth, 219 U.S. 296, 306 (1911). … Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 , 94 S.Ct. 2547 , 41 L.Ed.2d 439 (1974). It is precisely the role of the courts to determine whether those rights have been violated. Dillard v. Brown, 652 F.2d 316, 320 (3d Cir.1981).

Sherwood Bros. v. District of Columbia

113 F.2d 162 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 29, 1940

Young, 1933, 210 Wis. 588 , 247 N.W. 61 ], appeal from a local board of tax appeals to the state board of tax appeals [Ettrick v. … Brown, 1891, 16 Colo. 462 , 27 P. 945 , 14 L.R.A. 120 ; Williams v. Lane, 1894, 87 Wis. 152 , 58 N.W. 77 . 6 E. g., Shea v. San Bernardino, 1936, 7 Cal.2d 688 , 62 P.2d 365 ; Myers v.

Caton v. Canal Zone Government

522 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, Canal Zone · Oct 1, 1981

A lion in the street is the Supreme Court’s opinion in Brown v. … See REA v. Middendorf, 587 F.2d 4 (6th Cir. 1978); Craig v. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 581 F.2d 189 (8th Cir. 1978); Bell v. Brown, 557 F.2d 849 (D.C.Cir.1977). Compare Decker v.

Harman v. United States

718 A.2d 114 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 1998

Budoo v. United States, 677 A.2d 51, 54 (D.C.1996). We turn first to the procedural claims raised by the government and Harman. Citing Brown v. … As we said in DeVeau v.

United Steelworkers of America, Local Union 14534 v. National Labor Relations Board

983 F.2d 240 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 12, 1993

Recently, however, the Board has adopted a more restrictive reading of the Truitt disclosure requirements. The Board’s change of heart apparently resulted from NLRB v. Harvstone Mfg. … The Board contends that the Union did not thereby render its offer conditional. See Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v.

Midwest Regional Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Amf Head Division of Amf, Inc., Intervenor. Amf Head Division of Amf, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, Midwest Regional Joint Board, Intervenor

564 F.2d 434 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 24, 1977

We are to sustain the Board's determinations if they are supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole. NLRB v. Brown, 380 U.S 278, 85 S.Ct. 980 , 13 L.Ed.2d 839 (1965); Universal Camera Corp. v. … NLRB v. Brown, supra, 380 U.S. at 287 , 85 S.Ct. 980 ; Mueller Brass Co. v. NLRB, supra, 544 F.2d at 819 .

Jordon v. Bondy

114 F.2d 599 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 29, 1940

Young v. United States, 5 Cir., 1939, 107 F.2d 490 : People v. Vick, 1926, 235 Mich. 475 , 209 N.W. 584 [with which compare People v. Redman, 1930, 250 Mich. 334 , 230 N.W. 196 ]; Mitchell v. … United States, 9 Cir., 1926, 15 F.2d 168 ; Miller v. United States, 7 Cir., 1931, 53 F.2d 316 ; Beard v. United States, 8 Cir., 1932, 59 F.2d 940 ; Love v. United States, 9 Cir., 1935, 74 F.2d 988 ; United States v.

World Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Pan American World Airways, Inc., Intervenor

447 F.2d 377 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 5, 1971

American Airlines v. CAB, 98 U.S.App. D.C. 348, 354, 235 F.2d 845 , 851 (1956). … Petitioner in its brief relies on Pan American World Airways v.

Greensboro-High Point Airport Authority v. Civil Aeronautics Board

262 F.2d 689 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 17, 1958

262 F.2d 689 GREENSBORO-HIGH POINT AIRPORT AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent, City of Charlotte, North Carolina, Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Piedmont Aviation, Inc., Intervenors. No. 14382. … PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Civil Aeronautics Board entered after the Board had completed proceedings undertaken as a result of our order of remand in Greensboro-High Point Airport Authority v

Raymond F. Kravis Center for the Performing Arts, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

550 F.3d 1183 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 30, 2008

BPH & Co. v. NLRB, 333 F.3d 213, 217 (D.C. … ’s decision in NLRB v.

The Palisades Citizens Association, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Washington Airways, Inc., Intervenor

420 F.2d 188 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 1969

See United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256, 265 , 66 S.Ct. 1062 , 90 L.Ed. 1206 (1946) and Griggs v. Allegheny County, supra. … United States v. 15,909 Acres, 176 F.Supp. 447, 448 (S.D.Cal.1958). 7 . The final opinion of the Board appears in the Joint Appendix of the parties in the ease of National Capital Airlines v.

International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers v. Subversive Activities Control Board

353 F.2d 848 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 1, 1965

American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 380 U.S. 503 , 85 S.Ct. 1148 , 14 L.Ed.2d 39 (1965); and Veterans of Abraham Lincoln Brigade v. … These eases, and Brown in particular, may or may not represent, as petitioner claims, significant variations in the Supreme Court’s thinking from Communist Party of United States v.

Arthur Shelton v. United States Board of Parole, Harvey Marion Boswell v. United States Board of Parole, Donald L. Smith v. .Hugh Rivers, Chairman, District of Columbia Board of Parole, Elbert Henry White v. United States Board of Parole, John L. Jacobs v. District of Columbia Board of Parole, George L. Williams v. Paul H. Preston, Superintendent, District of Columbia Jail

388 F.2d 567 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 1, 1967

SMITH, Appellant, v. .hugh RIVERS, Chairman, District of Columbia Board of Parole et al., Appellees. Elbert Henry WHITE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES BOARD OF PAROLE et al., Appellees. John L. JACOBS, Appellant, v. … Shelton v. United States Board of Parole, No. 20591, infra. 3 2.