Case law

International Union, United Automobile Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. National Labor Relations Board

442 F.2d 893 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 2, 1971

The Board rejected the findings and dismissed the proceedings. … Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1950).

United States v. Muhammad Abdul-Saboor

85 F.3d 664 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 1996

Chimel v. … See United States v.

Shalom Baranes Associates, P.C. v. 900 F Street Corp.

940 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 18, 1996

In sum, the evidence establishes that either an express contract or a contract implied-in-fact, see Brown v. … Bowler v. Joyner, 562 A.2d 1210 (D.C.1989).

Truck Drivers and Helpers, Local Union 568, Affiliated With International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. And Union of Transportation Employees, Truck Drivers and Helpers, Local Union 568, Affiliated With International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Intervenor

379 F.2d 137 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 18, 1967

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. … In Ferro v.

Adamski v. McHugh

304 F. Supp. 3d 227 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 31, 2015

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON, United States District Judge Plaintiff Thomas Adamski is a former soldier in the United States Army who has spent decades trying to get the Army to modify his military records. … . at 24 (citing Mullen v.

Maloney v. Blinken

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 22, 2021

See Kowal, 16 F.3d at 1276; see also Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (internal citation omitted) (“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”); Browning v. … See Spaeth v. Georgetown Univ., 943 F. Supp. 2d 198, 210 (D.D.C. 2013), citing Zahorik v.

Metal Processors' Union Local No. 16, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Poray, Inc., Intervenor

337 F.2d 114 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 18, 1964

B. v. … N.L.R.B. v.

JAMARR MEDLEY ANTOINE RICHARDSON and LUCIOUS MCLEOD v. UNITED STATES

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2014

Catlett v. … Scott v.

Franklin Phillips v. Interior Board of Mine Operations Appeals, Bituminous Coaloperators' Association and Kentucky Carbon Corporation, Intervenors

500 F.2d 772 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 26, 1974

The Supreme Court has construed the corresponding NLRA provision broadly: in NLRB v. … Decision of Board, in App. at 37. . Id. at 39. This has been the position of the Board in another case which is presently before this court, Munsey v. Morton, No. 72-2095. .

Hairston v. District of Columbia

638 F. Supp. 198 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 25, 1986

Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2709 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … See D.C.Code § l-633.2(a)(5)(G); see generally District of Columbia v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 762 F.2d 129, 131 n. 1 (D.C.Cir.1985) (noting present supercession of Back Pay Act); Brown v.

Perdue Farms, Inc., Cookin' Good Division, Petitioner/cross-Respondent v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent/cross-Petitioner

144 F.3d 830 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 29, 1998

Synergy Gas Corp. v. NLRB, 19 F.3d 649, 651 (D.C.Cir.1994). Our review of the Board’s factual conclusions is “highly deferential.” LCF, Inc. v. … Co. v.

American Federation Of Television And Radio Artists, Afl-Cio, Kansas City Local v. National Labor Relations Board

395 F.2d 622 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 18, 1968

We begin by noting the deference a court gives to a Board finding of impasse. See Dallas General Drivers etc. v. … Drivers etc. v. NLRB, 122 U.S.App.D.C. 417, 420 , 355 F.2d 842 , 845 (1966); NLRB v.

Fugazy Continental Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Fugazy Continental Corporation, Elite Services, Inc., and Ganser's Auto Service, Inc.

725 F.2d 1416 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 20, 1984

P 10,750 FUGAZY CONTINENTAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. … Tanaka Construction, Inc. v. NLRB, 675 F.2d 1029, 1035 (9th Cir.1982); NLRB v.

Princeton Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance Company v. Lexicon Title Services, LLC.

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 10, 2026

Id.; see also Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … See MedImmune, Inc. v.

United Transportation Union, Local No. 1699 v. National Labor Relations Board, Safeway Trails, Inc., Intervenor

546 F.2d 1038 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 9, 1976

See Greater Boston Television Corp. v. FCC, 143 U.S.App.D.C. 383, 394 , 444 F.2d 841, 852 (1970), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 923 , 91 S.Ct. 2229 , 29 L.Ed.2d 701 (1971). … Given the uncertainties that surround both the Board’s and the ALJ’s opinions here, we vacate the Board’s order and remand this case to the Board for reconsideration. So ordered. 1 .

Conair Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, Local 222, International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Afl-Cio, Intervenor

721 F.2d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 15, 1983

Kuhn v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 183 F.2d 839, 842 (D.C.Cir.1950). … V.

Cooper v. Starbucks Coffee Corp.

164 A.3d 66 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2017

United States v. … Brown informed him that Starbucks had already decided to fire him. Other than the letter, Mr. Cooper has consistently denied the pushing allegation, including under ¡oath. Washington Times v.

Brisbon v. United States

894 A.2d 1121 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2006

Brown’s testimony on the same subject. We reject the second argument because it is precluded by Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38 , 105 S.Ct. 460 , 83 L.Ed.2d 443 (1984). A. … Bryant v. United States, 859 A.2d 1093, 1107 (D.C.2004) (citations omitted); see Price v. United States, 545 A.2d 1219, 1226 (D.C.1988) (“a lapse of time is relevant, but not controlling”); Bandoni v.

Cordell Smith v. United States

203 A.3d 790 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 2019

Moreover, the evidence suggested Austin was too 15 Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). 16 Brown v. … Johnson v.

Tony Armstrong & Floyd Joiner v. United States

164 A.3d 102 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 2017

United States v. … Umanzor v. United States, 803 A.2d 983, 993 (D.C. 2002) (citing Anderson v.