Case law

Powell v. District of Columbia

645 F. Supp. 66 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 16, 1986

See Washington, 429 A.2d at 1366 ; Brown v. District of Columbia, 304 A.2d at 293 ; see also Dellums v. … Because of the Brown v. United States opinion, plaintiff’s federal tort claims are preserved from the notice requirements of D.C.Code § 12-309.

Romero-Ostolaza v. Ridge

370 F. Supp. 2d 139 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2005

.”); (Wentz v. Maryland Casualty Co., 869 F.2d 1153, 1154-55 (8th Cir.1989); Brown v. Hartshorne Public School District No. 1, 864 F.2d 680, 682 (10th Cir.1988)). … Brown, 199 F.3d at 452 .

Rodriguez v. United States Department of Defense

236 F. Supp. 3d 26 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 15, 2017

Defs. of Wildlife v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 311 F. … DATE: February 15, 2017 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon v. Jewell

830 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 29, 2016

Appellants believe four things in particular prove their point: 1) a 1976 Department decision regarding the Stillaguamish Tribe; 2) a 1980 decision in Brown v. … The Brown v. Commissioner of Indian Affairs decision is of no greater help to Appellants. 8 IBIA 183 (1980).

MacMillan Publishing Co.,petitioner v. National Labor Relations Board, Union of Needle Trades, Industrial and Textile Employees, Afl-Cio, Intervenor

194 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 12, 1999

Co. v. NLRB, 117 F.3d 627, 635-36 (D.C.Cir.1997). … Airways, Inc. v. National Mediation Bd., 177 F.3d 985 (D.C.Cir.1999). In any event, the Board does not defend the ordering of a new election on such a ground.

J. F. Hoff Electric Company v. National Labor Relations Board, Local Union 323, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Intervenor

642 F.2d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 20, 1981

The Legal Ownership Argument: In NLRB v. … See also Seafarer’s Int’l Union v.

In re Gardner

625 A.2d 293 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 27, 1993

See, e.g., Franklin v. United States, 555 A.2d 1010, 1012 (D.C.App.1989) (guilty verdict is not a “conviction” that may be used to impeach a witness; need judgment of conviction premised on a sentence); Langley v. … United States, 515 A.2d 729, 734 (D.C.App.1986) (final judgment of conviction means sentence); see also Godfrey v.

Cooper v. O'CONNOR

99 F.2d 135 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 27, 1938

Brewer, 57 App.D.C. 126, 130 , 18 F.2d 168, 172 , 53 A.L.R. 1519 , certiorari denied, 275 U.S. 530 , 48 S.Ct. 28 , 72 L.Ed. 409 ; Brown v. … Ed. 696 . 21 Lang v. Wood, 67 App.D.C. 287 , 92 F.2d 211 . 22 Brown v. Rudolph, 58 App.D.C. 116 , 25 F.2d 540 , cert. denied, 277 U.S. 605 , 48 S.Ct. 601 , 72 L.Ed. 1011 . 23 Smith v.

Robertson v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 16, 2025

Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Grp., 517 U.S. 544, 557 (1996). … Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Grp., 517 U.S. at 546.

Yohannes v. Republic Gardens

217 F. Supp. 2d 91 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 5, 2002

In a non-summary hearing, Michael V. … See In re Brown, 454 F.2d 999, 1007 (D.C.Cir.1971).

Daniel Brink v. Continental Insurance Company

787 F.3d 1120 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 2, 2015

Before: GARLAND, Chief Judge, BROWN, Circuit Judge, and SENTELLE, Senior Circuit Judge. Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge SENTELLE. … See Barnard v. Zapata Haynie Corp., 975 F.2d 919, 920–21 (1st Cir. 1992); see also Sample v.

Graves v. United States

472 A.2d 395 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1984

judge, who tried Brown. … We hold merely that his argument, supporting his refusal to testify at the Brown trial, was premature. Under Kastigar v.

Behradrezaee v. Dashtara

910 A.2d 349 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2006

See Scattered Corp. v. … A board or a committee of the board may appear to be independent, but may not always act independently. Grimes, supra, 673 A.2d at 1219 (emphasis in the original). 14 . See also Cinerama, Inc. v.

MARLON WILLIAMS v. UNITED STATES

130 A.3d 343 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 2016

Brown’s testimonial hearsay statements, we conclude that their erroneous admission was harmless. See Duvall v. United States, 975 A.2d 839, 843 (D.C.2009) (applying the test for harmless error under Chapman v. … (quoting United States v. Brown, 352 F.3d 654, 664 (2d Cir.2003))). Mr. Williams has made no argument that the trial court plainly erred on this basis. .

Amalgamated Association Of Street, Electric Railway And Motor Coach Employees Of America, Afl v. National Labor Relations Board

238 F.2d 38 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 25, 1956

238 F.2d 38 99 U.S.App.D.C. 177 AMALGAMATED ASSOCIATION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY AND MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner, v. … In effectuating the policies of the Act the Board has a discretion not to exert jurisdiction to the limit of its power. National Labor Relations Board v.

National Railroad Passenger v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

670 F. Supp. 424 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 3, 1987

Browning-Ferris Indus, of Alabama, Inc. v. Alabama Dep’t of Envtl. Management, 799 F.2d 1473 ,1478 (11th Cir.1986) (quoting C. Wright, A. Miller & M. … See McNeese v. Board of Education, 373 U.S. 668 , 673 n. 5, 83 S.Ct. 1433 , 1436 n. 5, 10 L.Ed.2d 622 (1963); Louisiana Power & Light Co. v.

Pencheng Si v. Laogai Research Foundation Foundation

71 F. Supp. 3d 73 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 14, 2014

Matheny v. … DATE: October 14, 2014 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

Coe v. McHugh

968 F. Supp. 2d 237 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2013

See Occidental Eng'g Co. v. INS, 753 F.2d 766, 769–70 (9th Cir. 1985); see also Northwest Motorcycle Ass'n v. … A court need only find that the decision of a military review board “minimally contains a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.” Frizelle v. Slater, 111 F.3d 172, 176 (D.C.

In Re Susman

876 A.2d 637 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 2005

A detailed discussion of the underlying facts may be found in United States v. Helbling, 209 *638 F.3d 226 (3d Cir.2000). 2 . See Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Susman, 357 Md. 373 , 744 A.2d 548 (2000). … See, e.g., Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Susman, 568 Pa. 302 , 795 A.2d 957 (2002); Florida Bar v. Susman, 767 So.2d 463 (Fla.2000).

Seaboard & Western Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board. Seaboard & Western Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board (American Overseas Airlines, Inc., Intervenors)

181 F.2d 515 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 29, 1950

181 F.2d 515 86 U.S.App.D.C. 64 SEABOARD & WESTERN AIRLINES, Inc. v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD. SEABOARD & WESTERN AIRLINES, Inc. v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD (AMERICAN OVERSEAS AIRLINES, Inc., et al., Intervenors). … We think the case at bar is governed by the doctrine of Yankee Network v. Federal Communications Comm'n, 7 Federal Communications Comm'n v. Sanders Radio Station, 8 Alton v.