Case law

Womack v. United States

673 A.2d 603 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 1996

Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991); Lawrence v. United States, 566 A.2d 57, 60 (D.C.1989). We must defer to the trial judge’s findings of eviden-tiary fact. Lawrence, supra, 566 A.2d at 60 . … See Brown, supra, 590 A.2d at 1020 . B. Reasonableness, Proportionality, and the Fourth Amendment.

Margaret Dong v. Smithsonian Institution, Hirshhorn Museum & Sculpture Garden

125 F.3d 877 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 3, 1997

Energy Research Foundation v. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 917 F.2d 581, 583 (D.C.Cir.1990). … Miles & Co., Inc. v. Brown, 910 F.Supp. 1138, 1159 (E.D.Va.1995) (holding that quasi-government fisheries council “is not an ‘authority' of the U.S. Government because it has no ‘authority’ to do anything”).

Fairman v. District of Columbia

934 A.2d 438 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 2007

Corp. v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 343 U.S.App. … Lopata, supra, 735 A.2d at 937 (quoting Nghiem 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.

Reed v. ALLIEDBARTON SECURITY SERVICES, LLC

583 F. Supp. 2d 92 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 17, 2008

(quoting Dixon v. Coburg Dairy, Inc., 369 F.3d 811, 815-16 (4th Cir.2004) (en banc)). See also Johnson-Brown v. 2200 M. St. … See Johnson-Brown, 257 F.Supp.2d at 177 . See also Nat’l Org. for Women v. Mut. of Omaha Ins.

Betty G. Browning v. Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives

793 F.2d 380 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 8, 1986

GINSBURG, Circuit Judge: The court’s opinion in Browning v. Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, 789 F.2d 923 (D.C.Cir.1986), preserves this circuit’s prior decision in Walker v. … Assuring accurate testimony in such an important field is “directly related to the due functioning of the legislative process____” Browning *382 v. Clerk, U.S.

Texas Neighborhood Services v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

172 F. Supp. 3d 236 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2016

Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989); see also Kentucky v. … Alliance v. U.S.

District of Columbia Hospital Ass'n v. District of Columbia

73 F. Supp. 2d 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 29, 1999

Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 (1980). Res Judicata does not, however, bar a party or parties from relitigating a previously asserted claim dismissed on justiciability grounds. Cutler v. … Brown’s. Ms.

District of Columbia v. Casino Associates, Ltd.

684 A.2d 322 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 17, 1996

See also Lake Worth Towers, Inc. v. … See also The Washington Post Co. v.

Byers v. United States Tax Court

211 F. Supp. 3d 240 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2016

That entity, known as the Board of Tax Appeals (the “Board”), was created as “an independent agency in the executive branch of the Government.” Revenue Act *242 of 1924, Pub. L. … Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 151 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (reversing the district court because it failed to consider allegations found in a pro se plaintiffs opposition to a motion to dismiss). IV.

Hugh McKinney v. Christine Wormuth

5 F.4th 42 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 20, 2021

Third, the Board’s decision must demonstrate reasoned decisionmaking. See id. Our review of Board decisions involves “an unusually deferential application of the ‘arbitrary or capricious’ standard.” Kreis v. … McKinney also faults the Board for its brief analysis. The analysis, however, has sufficient clarity for us to discern the Board’s rationale. See Dickson v. Sec’y of Def., 68 F.3d 1396, 1404 (D.C.

Booth v. District of Columbia

701 F. Supp. 2d 73 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 1, 2010

See Holcomb v. Powell, 433 F.3d 889, 901 (D.C.Cir.2006). … (Pl.’s Opp’n [# 59] Ex. 3, Brown Affidavit ¶ 7.)

Moore v. Hartman

571 F.3d 62 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 7, 2009

Before: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, HENDERSON and BROWN, Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Chief Judge SENTELLE. … Eventually, Moore’s position gained traction, with several members of Congress pressing REI’s case with the USPS Board of Governors.

Nader v. Allegheny Airlines, Inc.

445 F. Supp. 168 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 10, 1978

British Airways Board v. Taylor, 1 All E.R. 65 (House of Lords 1976). … And, the following year in Knippen v.

In Re Squillacote

790 A.2d 514 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 2002

Indictment, United States v. Clark, Crim. No. 97-948-M (E.D.Va.). … In United States v.

Baptist Healthcare of Oklahoma, LLC v. Becerra

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2025

C., Inc. v. … Ctr. v.

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 .

United States ex rel. Just v. Simon

62 F.2d 879 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 3, 1933

Appeal from a judgment in the Supreme Court of the District dismissing a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the board of education to appoint appellant to the position of teacher of English in the colored senior high … No. 11,777; Bardwell v. Purrington, 107 Mass. 419, 425 ), and for that reason ineligible. It is immaterial, therefore, whether the vacancy occurred on March 15 or on July 17,1931.

Fuller v. Alexander

440 F. Supp. 380 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 27, 1977

See Colm v. Kissinger, 406 F.Supp. 1250 (D.D.C.1975) and Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 568 , 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977). … Knehans v.

United Transportation Union v. Surface Transportation Board and United States of America, Csx Transportation, Inc., Intervenor. Railway Labor Executives' Association v. Surface Transportation Board and United States of America

114 F.3d 1242 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 13, 1997

P 10,009 UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION, Petitioner, v. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD and United States of America, Respondents, CSX Transportation, Inc., Intervenor. … Louis Mackall, V, Attorney, Surface Transportation Board, argued the cause for the respondents. Henri F. Rush, General Counsel, Surface Transportation Board, was on brief. John J. Powers, III, and Robert J.