Case law

In re Bryant

46 A.3d 402 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 2012

The events leading to Bryant’s convictions are set forth more fully in United States v. Bryant, 655 F.3d 232 (3d Cir.2011). … The Board finds respondent’s convictions involve moral turpitude per se and recommends disbarment. The Board’s recommendation is unopposed.

Howad B. Silverberg v. Joanne S. Becker

191 A.3d 324 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 16, 2018

Rogers v. … Omnicare, Inc. v.

In re Dana W. Johnson

103 A.3d 194 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2014

XI, § 16 (c). 1 Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Maryland v. … The Board then directed Mr.

In Re Blum

859 A.2d 633 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 2004

XI, § 11(d) and referred the matter to the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”). The Board now recommends the réspondent be disbarred as reciprocal discipline. … XI, § 11(c), and our heightened deference to the Board when its recommendation is unopposed, see id. at § 11(f), we adopt the Board’s recommendation.

J.G. Kern Enterprises, Inc. v. NLRB

94 F.4th 18 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 1, 2024

This court’s role in reviewing a Board decision is “limited.” Wayneview Care Ctr. v. NLRB, 664 F.3d 341, 348 (D.C. Cir. 2011). … The General Counsel and the Board may use any available theory deemed appropriate to assess unfair labor practice allegations. See, e.g., NLRB v.

Rhodes v. United States Department of the Army

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 21, 2025

Ethyl Corp. v. Browner, 989 F.2d 522, 524 (D.C. Cir. 1993); see also Carpenters Indus. Council v. Salazar, 734 F. Supp. 2d 126, 132 (D.D.C. 2010); Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, 560 F. Supp. 2d 21, 23 (D.D.C. 2008). … See Borud v. Emmert, No. 24-1211-TNM, 2025 WL 894417, at *3 (D.D.C.

United States v. Lewis

486 A.2d 729 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 16, 1985

See Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730, 736 , 103 S.Ct. 1535, 1539 , 75 L.Ed.2d 502 (1983); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 468-69 , 91 S.Ct. 2022, 2039-40 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971). … In making its probable cause *734 determination the motions court relied on the standard in Texas v. Brown, supra, 460 U.S. at 742 , 103 S.Ct. at 1542-43 (a practical, nontechnical probability).

In Re Powell

646 A.2d 340 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1994

Cobb v. … Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Powell, 328 Md. 276 , 614 A.2d 102, 110 (1992). 2 .

Au Yi Lau v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service

555 F.2d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 28, 1977

Simmons v. … v.

Jackson v. Correctional Corporation of America

564 F. Supp. 2d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 14, 2008

See Brown v. Dist. of Columbia, Civil Action No. 04-2195, 2005 WL 3276267 , at *3 (D.D.C. … Brown v. Argenbright Security, Inc., 782 A.2d 752, 757 (D.C.2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also District of Columbia v.

Pan American World Airways, Inc. And Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Sudflug Suddeutsche Fluggesellschaft Mbh, Intervenor. Pan American World Airways, Inc. And Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Robert T. Murphy, Sudflug Suddeutsche Fluggesellschaft Mbh, Intervenor

392 F.2d 483 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 31, 1968

Switchmen's Union [of North America] v. [National] Mediation Board, 320 U.S. 297, 301 [, 64 S.Ct. 95 , 88 L.Ed. 61 ]. … Sparks v. C. A.

Chlorine Institute, Inc. v. Federal Railroad Administration

718 F.3d 922 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 11, 2013

Rush were on brief for amicus curiae Association of American Railroads in support of the respondents.  2 Before: HENDERSON, BROWN and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges. … Petroleum Inst. v. EPA, 683 F.3d 382, 386 (D.C. Cir. 2012); see Blanchette v. Conn. Gen. Ins.

Catholic Health Initiatives v. Sebelius

658 F. Supp. 2d 113 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2009

DOT, 843 F.2d at 1452; see also Humane Society v. Kempthorne, 579 F.Supp.2d at 13 . III. DISCUSSION Plaintiffs challenge the Board’s decision disallowing reimbursement. See Compl. ¶¶ 115-17. … While the PRM provision itself would be due less deference than a Board decision, see Public Citizen, Inc. v.

APCC Services, Inc. v. AT & T CORP.

254 F. Supp. 2d 135 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2003

United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544, 551 , 116 S.Ct. 1529 , 134 L.Ed.2d 758 (1996). … Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544 , 116 S.Ct. 1529 , 134 L.Ed.2d 758 (1996) [hereinafter “Brown Group ”]. (See Pis.’ Opp. at 19-20.) Plaintiffs’ reliance is, however, misplaced.

Baxley v. Wormuth

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 2024

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). … the Board’s interpretation of Army Regulation 600-85 under Kisor v.

In Re Matzkin

665 A.2d 1388 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 1995

See United States v. Matzkin, 14 F.3d 1014 (4th Cir.1994). We received a certified copy of the Fourth Circuit’s decision on December 7, 1994. … On November 30, 1994, in a written response to the Board’s recommendation, respondent asked this court to defer acting on the Board’s recommendation until the Fourth Circuit ruled on his motion.

Rex v. Federal Aviation Administration

321 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 10, 2009

It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the petition for review of the December 21, 2007 order of the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) be denied. … The NTSB’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, see Garvey v.

District Hospital Partners, L.P. v. NLRB

141 F.4th 1279 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 27, 2025

Avecor, Inc. v. … Regal Cinemas, Inc. v. NLRB, 317 F.3d 300, 306–07 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (quoting Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 488 (1951)). “We review the Board’s procedural rulings for an abuse of discretion.”

Aviel v. Gor

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 14, 2025

LLC v. Consumer Fin. Prot. … Berry v.

Christiana Tah v. Global Witness Publishing, Inc.

991 F.3d 231 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 19, 2021

Brown and Katie Townsend were on the brief for amici curiae Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 26 Media Organizations in support of appellees/cross- appellants. … Or put another way, “appellate courts do not sit as self-directed boards of legal inquiry and research, but essentially as arbiters of legal questions presented and argued by the parties before them.” Carducci v.