Case law

Hirschfeld v. Banner

462 F. Supp. 135 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 20, 1978

In agreeing with the examiner’s conclusions, the Patent and Trademark Office Board of Appeals (board) gave the following additional analysis: At the outset we note that no specific computer is cited in the disclosure as an … Monsanto Co. v. Kamp, 269 F.Supp. 818, 822 , 154 USPQ 259, 260 (D.D.C.1967); see DeSeversky v. Brenner, supra.

District of Columbia Republican Committee v. Board of Elections for the District of Columbia

336 F.2d 939 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 21, 1964

They disagreed over the authority of the Board of Elections to impose by regulation a requirement that proof of the acquiescence of each named individual be supplied. … The District Court denied relief for the reason that the Board was wholly without authority to permit the official ballot to include what is in effect a party presidential primary. We agree with the District Court.

Griffith v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

697 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 18, 1986

Office of Personnel Management, 771 F.2d 1504, 1510-11 (D.C.Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1089 , 106 S.Ct. 1478 , 89 L.Ed.2d 732 (1986); Brown v. United States, 631 F.Supp. 954 , 957 n. 6 (D.D.C. 1986). Cf. … National Mediation Board, 785 F.2d 1098, 1100 (D.C.Cir.1986); Physicians National House Staff Association v.

Idea Public Charter School v. District of Columbia

374 F. Supp. 2d 158 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 21, 2005

Because the parents in Yates had reserved the right to pursue a claim against the school board following the board’s decision not to place the child in a private school, the court held that the board need not wait for the … Brown v. Duchesne, 60 U.S. 183, 194 , 19 How. 183 , 15 L.Ed. 595 (1856); See also Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc., 513 U.S. 561, 568 , 115 S.Ct. 1061 , 131 L.Ed.2d 1 (1995).

Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc. v. Legal Services Corp.

740 F. Supp. 880 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 1990

Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281, 302 , 99 S.Ct. 1705, 1717 , 60 L.Ed.2d 208 (1979). 3 LSC’s effort to prohibit recipients from accepting redistricting cases is not rooted in any congressional grant of power. … As LSC acknowledged by citing this language from Brown in adopting the regulation, 54 Fed.

In Re White

11 A.3d 1226 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2011

See generally Brown v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 486 A.2d 37, 44-47 (D.C.1984) (en banc) (discussing DR 9-101(B)); D.C. Bar Op. … In Brown v.

Beverly Hills Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board

234 F. Supp. 698 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 20, 1964

Milbert v. Bison Laboratories, 260 F.2d 431 , C.A.3d. . Sperry Rand Corp. v. Bell Telephone Laboratories, 272 F.2d 29 , C.A.2d. . Hadjipateras v. Pacific, S.A., 290 F.2d 697 , C.A.5th. . Houston Fearless Corp. v.

Keystone Steel & Wire, Division of Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

41 F.3d 746 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 16, 1994

Local 21, Intemational Brotherhood, of Teamsters v. … In Teamsters v.

Highway Truck Drivers and Helpers v. National Labor Relations Board

302 F.2d 897 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 21, 1962

302 F.2d 897 HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS AND HELPERS, LOCAL 107, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. No. 16429. … Local 1424, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO v. N. L. R. B.

Building Material & Construction Teamsters Union Local No. 216 v. National Labor Relations Board

520 F.2d 172 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 29, 1975

See Enterprise Ass’n, Local 638 v. N.L. R.B., No. 73-1764, 172 U.S.App.D.C. -, 521 F.2d 885 , decided July 1, 1975; Meat & Highway Drivers, Local 710 v. … As the Supreme Court said in N.L.R.B. v.

Bolyard v. Watson

181 F. Supp. 882 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 1959

Being mindful of such cases as Abbott v. Coe, 71 App.D.C. 195 , 109 F.2d 449 , and the Bullard Co. v. Coe, U.S., 79 App. … In this I am convinced that the Board erred. The error of the Board resides in its method of rationalization.

Robert B. Thompson, Jr. v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia

299 F.2d 920 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 8, 1962

By an order of September 1, 1944, the Board of Education raised the Phelps institution to the level of a senior high school,, and shortly thereafter the Board “transferred” Thompson from the Phelps Vocational School to the … The Board and the Superintendent moved to dismiss the complaint as failing to state a claim upon which relief could he granted. The District Court granted the motion on that ground. Thompson appeals.

Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen, Local Union 576 v. National Labor Relations Board

516 F.2d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 1, 1975

Gissel *319 Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575 , 89 S.Ct. 1918 , 23 L.Ed.2d 547 (1969), and this court’s decision in Local 195, Wine & Liquor Salesmen v. NLRB, 146 U.S.App.D.C. 383 , 452 F.2d 1312 (1971). … In Local 347, Meat Cutters v.

Wine & Liquor Salesmen & Allied Workers Local Union 195 v. National Labor Relations Board

452 F.2d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 3, 1971

NLRB v. Elliott-Williams Company, 345 F.2d 460, 463 (7th Cir. 1965) ; Warner Company v. NLRB, 365 F.2d 435, 437 (3rd Cir. 1966); NLRB v. … Local Lodge No. 1424, I.A.M. v. NLRB, 362 U.S. 411 , 80 S.Ct. 822 , 4 L.Ed.2d 832 (1960). NLRB v.

Pa. State Corr. Officers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

894 F.3d 370 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 2018

Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB , 340 U.S. 474 , 488, 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951). We will affirm the legal conclusions of the Board so long as they are not arbitrary and capricious. See Mail Contractors of Am. v. … The Board argues, following Alden Leeds, Inc. v. NLRB , 812 F.3d 159 , 167-68 (D.C.

In re Wayne R. Rohde

191 A.3d 1124 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 2018

Kil v. Commonwealth , 12 Va.App. 802 , 407 S.E.2d 674 , 679 (1991). … Sanchez v.

Lloyd v. United States

333 A.2d 387 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 1975

There was testimony at trial that appellant pulled a knife on Tate and backed him over some boards that were lying about in the yard. The appellant, in pursuit, fell over Tate and cut his face on the boards. … v.

Perry v. Ross

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2022

Cir. 1983) (“The Title VII remedy declared exclusive for federal employees in Brown v. … See Brown v. Ulmer, No. 1:21-CV-03128 (UNA), 2022 WL 226878, at *1 (D.D.C.

Carpenters, Local Union 2471 v. National Labor Relations Board

481 F.3d 804 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 16, 2007

Thus, where the record evidence is in conflict, the substantial evidence test requires the Board “to take account of contradictory evidence,” Lakeland Bus Lines, Inc. v. … Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 , 103 S.Ct. 2856 , 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983)). Our review of the Board’s refusal to pierce A.J.

Garcia v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 14, 2024

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). “[A] complaint [does not] suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual enhancement.’” Ashcroft v. … Brown v. Wilhelm, 819 F. Supp. 2d 41, 44 (D.D.C. 2011) (BAH).