Case law

In Re Uscinski

981 A.2d 588 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2009

United States v. Uscinski, 369 F.3d 1243, 1246 (11th Cir.2004). … The Board’s Recommendation The Board makes two recommendations. 10 First, the Board recommends that respondent be disbarred, as a “substantially different discipline,” for intentional misappropriation of client funds.

Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Washington Industries, Inc. Andmcewen Manufacturing Company, Intervenors. McEwen Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board

419 F.2d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 23, 1970

The Supreme Court last term made it clear in NLRB v. … See Regal Knitware Co. v. NLRB., 324 U.S. 9, 14 , 65 S.Ct. 478 , 89 L.Ed. 661 (1945); Bullock v. United States, 6 Cir., 265 F.2d 683, 691 , cert. denied, 360 U.S. 909 932, 79 S.Ct. 1294 , 3 L.Ed. 1260 (1959); Kasper v.

Bloch v. Albright

43 F. Supp. 2d 17 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 23, 1999

In reviewing a decision of the Board this court must afford great deference to the Board’s decision. See United States v. Paddack, 825 F.2d 504, 514 (D.C.Cir.1987). … Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v.

District of Columbia v. Totten

5 F.2d 374 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 4, 1925

District of Columbia v. Tyrrell, 41 App. D. C. 463; Brown v. District of Columbia, 29 App. D. C. 273, 25 L. R. A. (N. S.) 98; Coates v. District of Columbia, 42 App. D. C. 194; Jones v. … This rule was recognized as correct in Haag v. Board, etc., 60 Ind. 511 . See 2 Hilliard, Torts, 4th Ed. 387, 388; Stein v. City of Lafayette, 6 Ind. App. 414 ; City of Valparaiso v. Moffit, 12 Ind. App. 250 .”

Denver S. Cooper v. United States Railroad Retirement Board

13 F.3d 421 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 6, 1993

COOPER, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, Respondent. No. 93-1442. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Dec. 6, 1993. … In Cooper v. Railroad Retirement Board, 977 F.2d 647 (D.C.Cir.1992), we held that petitioner was without fault in causing the overpayment.

Dorothy C. Parker v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

561 F.2d 320 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 30, 1977

Brown v. GSA, supra, 425 U.S. at 832 , 96 S.Ct. at 1968 . … Title VII’s “careful blend of administrative and judicial enforcement powers,” Brown v.

Reeder v. James

121 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 14, 2015

Military records are reviewed by the civilian boards for correction of military records, and federal courts review final decisions made by the civilian records correction boards under the APA. Remmie v. … Rudo v. Geren, 818 F.Supp.2d 17, 25-26 (D.D.C.2011) (quoting Frizelle v. Slater, 111 F.3d 172, 176 . (D.C.Cir.1997)).

Blackledge v. United States

447 A.2d 46 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1982

United States v. … But see Brock v.

Adair v. Winter

451 F. Supp. 2d 210 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 11, 2006

Sheldon v. … Crawford v.

Evans v. First Mount Vernon, Ila

District Court, District of Columbia · May 24, 2011

She contacted a mortgage broker, defendant Sherman Brown ("Brown"), to help her secure financing for the purchase. Id. ¶ 13. … v.

Agapito v. District of Columbia

525 F. Supp. 2d 150 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2007

There has been no reply from the attorneys at the Brown firm. II. … See Laffey v.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks

245 F. Supp. 835 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 1965

not subject to judicial review, Switchmen’s Union of North America v. … Hod Carriers, etc. v.

Harry Joseph Pollack and Arthur Morton Pollack v. Joy R. Simonson

350 F.2d 740 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 3, 1965

Compare Melody Music, Inc. v. Federal Communications Comm., 120 U.S.App.D.C. -, 345 F.2d 730 , decided April 8, 1965; Hornsby v. Allen, 326 F.2d 605 (5th Cir. 1964); Yick Wo v. … See Hornsby v. Allen, supra, note 4 .

First Student, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

935 F.3d 604 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 3, 2019

Leasing Co. v. NLRB, 831 F.3d 534, 546 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (citing NLRB v. Katz, 369 U.S. 736, 743 (1962)). The “perfectly clear” successor doctrine has its origins in the Supreme Court’s decision in NLRB v. … e.g., Carpenters & Millwrights, Local Union 2471 v.

Matthew E. Steger, III v. Defense Investigative Service Department of Defense

717 F.2d 1402 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 13, 1983

The factors relevant to the Board’s determination of attorney’s fees were established by the MSPB itself in Allen v. Postal Service, 2 MSPB 582 (1980). … Similarly, in Stout v.

Rural Development Innovations Limited v. Marocco

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 13, 2026

acting USADF Board members." … Schs. v.

Coleman v. Brucker

257 F.2d 661 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 19, 1958

And in Service v. … Accardi v.

Kennedy v. Real Estate Commission

202 A.2d 774 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 1964

Functions transferred to the Board of Commissioners. — There are hereby transferred to the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia * * * all functions of the following named offices and agencies of the Government … Then on September 19, 1963, the Board of Commissioners amended Part V, Section E, of Reorganization Order No. 59 to state: “E.

Gould v. Green

141 F.2d 533 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 28, 1944

Story v. Rives, 68 App.D.C. 325, 330 , 97 F.2d 182, 187 ; King v. United States, 69 App.D.C. 10, 12 , 98 F.2d 291, 293 ; Douglas v. King, 8 Cir., 110 F.2d 911, 913 , 127 A.L.R. 1200 ; Clark v. … Story v. Rives, 68 App.D.C. 325 , 97 F.2d 182 . Act of July 15, 1932, 47 Stat. 696 , 698, D..C.Code, 1940, § 24—208. 47 Stat. 381 , 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 716a, 716b.

Nader v. McAuliffe

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 7, 2009

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. The court’s resolution of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion represents a ruling on the merits with res judicata effect. Haase v.