Case law

Stanton v. Exelon Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2021

Brown v. Georgetown Univ. Hosp. Medstar Health, 828 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (D.D.C. 2011) (citation omitted); Carroll v. England, 321 F. Supp. 2d 58, 69 (D.D.C. 2004). … Brown, 828 F. Supp. 2d at 8; Weigert v. Georgetown Univ., 120 F. Supp. 2d 1, 19 (D.D.C. 2000) (“less substantial work assignments” did not amount to adverse action).

Schrader v. Tomlinson

311 F. Supp. 2d 21 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2004

Brown v. General Services Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 823-33 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976). … “[T]he plaintiff who fails to comply, to the letter, with administrative deadlines ‘ordinarily will be denied a judicial audience.’ ” Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 13 (D.C.Cir.1985) (citation omitted).

Manhattan Tankers, Inc. v. Dole

596 F. Supp. 974 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 1984

Seatrain Shipbuilding Corp. v. … See Connally v. Georgia, 429 U.S. 245 , 97 S.Ct. 546 , 50 L.Ed.2d 444 (1977) (magistrate paid for issuance, but not non-issuance, of warrants); Brown v.

Honemond v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services and Georgetown University

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 2023

Though the court’s review is of the CRB’s decision, we do not “ignore the compensation order which is the subject of the Board’s review.” Georgetown Univ. Hosp. v. D.C. Dep’t of Emp. … Area Transit Auth. v. D.C. Dep’t of Emp. Servs., 926 A.2d 140, 149 (D.C. 2007) (“Browne”). A “disability” is a “physical or mental incapacity because of injury which results in the loss of wages.” Negussie v. D.C.

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

470 F.2d 422 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 17, 1972

No. 149 (1971) (Members Fanning and Brown, dissenting), the Board had engaged in easc-by-case examinations of the conflicting interests of the employees and management. … Majority opinion at 424 (quoting NLRB v.

Angulo v. Gray

907 F. Supp. 2d 107 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 3, 2012

See id.; Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Administrative Review Board.” 29 C.F.R § 5.11(d).

Black v. Tomlinson

425 F. Supp. 2d 101 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2006

See Brown v. … V.

Capital Area Immigrants' Rights Coalition v. U.S. Department of Justice

264 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 21, 2003

In Heckler v. … Kenney v.

In Re Alexander

243 A.2d 901 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1968

Co. v. Zimzoris, D.C.Mun.App., 66 A.2d 414 (1949). 5 . Cf. Stern v. South Chester Tube Co., 390 U.S. 606 , 88 S.Ct. 1332 , 20 L.Ed.2d 177 (decided April 22, 1968). 6 . Brown v. … Reed v. Harris, 348 Mo. 426 , 153 S.W.2d 834 (1941). 8 . United States v. McLeod, 385 F.2d 734 (5th Cir. 1967). See also Herschel v. Dyra, 365 F.2d 17 (7th Cir.) cert. den. Herschel v.

International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers v. National Labor Relations Board

316 F.2d 373 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 14, 1963

However, in another proceeding this determination was appealed and was remanded to the Board for further consideration. N. L. R. B. v. … See National Labor Relations Board v. Coca-Cola Bot. Co., 350 U.S. 264 , 76 S.Ct. 383 , 100 L.Ed. 285 (1956); National Labor Relations Board v.

United States v. Lester H. Thurman

436 F.2d 280 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 28, 1970

United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354 , 358, 389 F.2d 305, 309 (1967) ; Brown v. United States, 125 U.S.App.D.C. 43 , 365 F.2d 976 (1966). 12 . See United States v. … Skinner, 412 F.2d 98, 101-102 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 967 , 90 S.Ct. 448 , 24 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969) ; Brown v. United States, supra note 11. 13 . Mathies v.

International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Boeing Company, Intervenor

595 F.2d 664 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 8, 1979

The decision of the administrative law judge is appended to that of the Board. Boeing Co., supra note 2, 214 N.L.R.B. at 545. 18 . Id. at 559-560. 19 . NLRB v. … Young’s Super Mkts. v.

Hatch, Donald J. v. DC

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 30, 1999

See Brown v. Plaut, 131 F.3d 163, 170 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (identifying "a number of unsettled questions about how to apply Sandin"). … Blankenship, 100 F.3d 640, 642 (8th Cir. 1996); Dominique v. Weld, 73 F.3d 1156, 1160 (1st Cir. 1996). We too faced this issue in Brown v.

Ramaprakash v. Federal Aviation Administration

346 F.3d 1121 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 21, 2003

In Administrator v. U.S. … Administrator v.

Sere v. Group Hospitalization, Inc.

443 A.2d 33 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 1982

Brown v. Coates, supra at 303, 253 F.2d at 39 . See McIntosh v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., supra at 521; Den v. Den, supra at 648. More precisely, the breach must merge with and assume the character of a willful tort. … District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, D.C.App., 372 A.2d 1286, 1287-88 (1977), vacated in part and amended, 396 A.2d 992 (1979); Laughlin v. Eicher, 79 U.S.App.

Kien v. United States

749 F. Supp. 286 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 12, 1990

In Mondy v. … In Speiser v.

Flanaghan v. Charles H. Tompkins Co.

182 F.2d 92 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 3, 1950

Berrington v. Phillips (1836), 1 M. & W. 48; Attwood v. Taylor (1840), 1 M. & G. 279. 4 . Dyker Building Co. v. United States, — U.S.App.D.C. —, 182 F.2d 85 . Cf. Shima v. … Brown, 77 U.S.App.D.C. 115 , 133 F.2d 48 , certiorari denied 318 U.S. 787 , 63 S.Ct. 982 , 87 L.Ed. 1154 ; Grand Trunk Western R. Co. v. H. W.

Hicklin, Jr. v. McDonald

110 F. Supp. 3d 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 8, 2015

Bowden, 106 F.3d at 437 (citing Brown v. GSA, 425 U.S. 920, 832-33 (1976)). … Likewise, in Brown v.

United States ex rel. Gillem v. Carusi

32 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 6, 1929

Appeal from a judgment in the Supreme Court of the District, dismissing a mandamus proceeding to compel the board of education to classify appellant in and assign him to class 2, group C, of teachers in the junior high schools … In our view, the board rightly required him to submit to an examination to establish such eligibility. A different view would be unreasonable and inconsistent with the quoted provisions of the act of 1906.

McIver v. Shulkin

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2018

P. 8(a)(2); accord Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (per curiam). A motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) “tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.” Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. … (citing Yates v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 145 F.3d 1480 (Fed.