Case law

Abadie v. Organization for Environmental Growth, Inc.

806 A.2d 1225 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2002

Fruin-Colnon Corp. v. … See Colton v.

1776 K ST. ASSOCIATES v. District of Columbia

446 A.2d 1114 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1982

See Schmidt v. District of Columbia, Tax Docket 2628 (January 2, 1979). … See District of Columbia v.

Cohen v. Basiliko

106 A.2d 142 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 1954

Burrows Motor Co. v. Davis, D.C.Mun.App., 76 A.2d 163 ; Gunn v. Brown, D.C.Mun.App., 59 A.2d 518 ; Trans-Lux Radio City Corp. v. Service Parking Corp., D.C.Mun.App., 54 A.2d 144 . See also Sheets v. … Gunn v. Brown, supra, 59 A.2d at page 519 .

In Re Huber

708 A.2d 259 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 1998

See, e.g., Bingham v. Goldberg, Marchesano, Kohlman, Inc., 637 A.2d 81 , 95 n. 34 (D.C.1994). … See In re Gorfkle, 444 A.2d 934, 939-40 (D.C.1982); see also Zapata v. Zapata, 499 A.2d 905, 908 (D.C. 1985). 6 .

Truck Drivers and Helpers Local No. 728, Affiliated With the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. National Labor Relations Board, Overnite Transportation Company, Intervenor. National Labor Relations Board v. Overnite Transportation Company

364 F.2d 682 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 28, 1966

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, Overnite Transportation Company, Intervenor. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. OVERNITE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, Respondent. No. 19703. No. 19720. … Amalgamated Clothing Workers v.

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ingredion Inc.

930 F.3d 509 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 19, 2019

The court’s assessment of the Board’s decision occurs in light of Congress’s broad delegation to the Board to carry out the Act, see, e.g., NLRB v. Curtin Matheson Sci., Inc., 494 U.S. 775, 786 (1990); Allied Mech. … The Board’s broad discretion to fashion remedies for violations of the Act, see, e.g., Fibreboard Paper Prods. Corp. v.

Dave v. Lanier

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 3, 2010

Macharia v. United States, 334 F.3d 61, 64, 67 (D.C. Cir. 2003); Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 156, 165 (D.C. Cir. 2003); Browning, 292 F.3d at 242. … Warren v. District of Columbia, 353 F.3d 36, 40 (D.C. Cir. 2004); Browning, 292 F.3d at 242. “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”

In Re Harkins

899 A.2d 755 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 18, 2006

See Harkins v. United States, 810 A.2d 895 (D.C.2002). The facts of the underlying incident are detailed in our previous opinion: On the morning of October 8, 1999, the [victim], Ms. … Mungo v. United States, 772 A.2d 240, 245 (D.C.2001).

Jane Doe v. United States Department of Justice

753 F.2d 1092 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 1, 1985

In Board of Regents v. … See Brown v. United States, 742 F.2d 1498, 1504-07 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc).

Tinner v. District of Columbia Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs

703 A.2d 833 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 11, 1997

See Joseph v. District of Columbia Bd. of Medicine, 587 A.2d 1085, 1088 (D.C.1991); Superior Beverages v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Bd., 567 A.2d 1319, 1325 (D.C.1989). … V. In sum, although the Board’s single sitting requirement may result in an unwelcome outcome for applicants situated similarly to Dr.

Matter of Burton

472 A.2d 831 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 11, 1984

In Simmons v. … In Johnstone v.

United States v. Singhal

800 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 29, 2010

Furthermore, he asserts that pursuant to United States v. … Boca Investerings P’ship v.

Grell v. Trump

330 F. Supp. 3d 311 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 12, 2018

Grell's complaint also vaguely sketches a claim under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"), seeking review of an Army Board for Correction of Military Records ("ABCMR") determination. … Browning v. Clinton , 292 F.3d 235 , 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction Under Rule 12(b)(1), a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Lujan v.

An opinion was released in case 22-7117, Michelle Florio v. Gallaudet University

119 F.4th 67 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 4, 2024

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 247 (D.C. Cir. 2002). The district court held that “the challenged statements are about Gallaudet’s Kappa Gamma chapter as a whole, not about any one member.” Florio, 619 F. … Browning, 292 F.3d at 247. Florio alleges that he was incorrectly identified as appearing in the photograph.

Beckford v. United States

950 F. Supp. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 10, 1997

See, for example, Williams v. Baker, 572 A.2d 1062 (D.C.1990); District of Columbia v. Cooper, 483 A.2d 317, 321 (D.C.1984). … Mitchell, 533 A.2d at 629 ; District of Columbia v. Brown, 589 A.2d 384, 387 (D.C.1991).

In Re Pleshaw

2 A.3d 169 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 12, 2010

On review, the Board affirmed all of the hearing committee’s findings of disciplinary violations, with the exception of its finding of negligent misappropriation of conservator funds. 4 The Board disagreed with the hearing … See M.A.P. v. Ryan, 285 A.2d 310, 312 (D.C. 1971) ("[N]o division of this court will *175 overrule a prior decision of this court[;] ... such result can only be accomplished by this court en banc."). 25 .

Morrell J. Roddy v. Civil Aeronautics Board and the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency

299 F.2d 136 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 14, 1962

RODDY, Petitioner, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD and the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency, Respondents. No. 16515. United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. Argued Jan. 24, 1962.

Angarano v. United States

329 A.2d 453 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 1974

Action, 217 So.2d 323 (Fla.1969) (Should the Board of Governors on behalf of the Bar advocate electoral support for revised Constitution); Sams v. Olah, supra (Whether the State Bar Act was constitutional); Button v. … Accord, United States v. Brown, 155 U.S. App.D.C. 177, 179, 476 F.2d 933, 935 (1973); United States v. Thompson, 154 U.S.App.D.C. 347, 348 , 475 F.2d 931, 932 (1973). See also Marshall v.

International Union Of Electrical, Radio And Machine Workers, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

367 F.2d 333 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 30, 1966

367 F.2d 333 125 U.S.App.D.C. 107 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS, AFL-CIO, Petitioner v. … In so doing the Board stated: 'We are, we believe, precluded' from re-evaluating the reprimand.

Goldsmith v. Clabaugh

6 F.2d 94 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 4, 1925

of the Act *96 of June 2, 1924 ( 43 Stat. 253 , 336), considered by us in Goldsmith v. … See, also, Hitchcock v. Smith, 34 App. D. C. 521, 529, and Turner v. Fisher, 222 U. S. 204, 208 , 32 S. Ct. 37 , 56 L. Ed. 165 .