Case law

Zacharias v. McGrath

105 F. Supp. 421 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 1952

There being no statutory definition of stowaway the Board’s determination under the circumstances was justified. Cf. United States ex rel. Candreva v. Smith, 7 Cir., 1928, 27 F.2d 642 . … National Labor Relations Board, 1941, 313 U.S. 177 , 61 S.Ct. 845 , 85 L.Ed. 1271 . American Power & Light Company v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 1946, 329 U.S. 90 , 67 S.Ct. 133 , 91 L.Ed. 103 . Ludecke v.

In re Certain Carriers

241 F. Supp. 1004 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 7, 1965

The Court has given due consideration to the decision of the Supreme Court in Republic Steel Corp. v. … The Court wishes to say that is observations are not to be taken as a criticism of the Board. The Board has performed a difficult ana intricate task in a superb manner.

Gilbert v. Federal Deposit Insurance

950 F. Supp. 1194 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 3, 1997

Brown v. Secretary of the Army, 918 F.2d 214, 217 (D.C.Cir.1990); see also Fields v. … Cooper v. U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, 24 F.3d 1414, 1416 (D.C.Cir.1994) (quoting Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 111-112 , 113 S.Ct. 566, 573 , 121 L.Ed.2d 494 (1992)).

Isbrandtsen Co. v. United States

239 F.2d 933 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 9, 1956

Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd. v. United States, supra. … . §§ 1-7 , 15 note without the particular system having been passed upon initially by the Board. And in A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi v.

Breen v. DC POLICE FIREFIGHTERS RET. BD.

731 A.2d 843 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 1999

BREEN, Petitioner, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT AND RELIEF BOARD, Respondent. No. 97-AA-272. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued May 18, 1999. … The Board found petitioner was sixty-one percent disabled and thus entitled to an annuity of $15,834.38. Petitioner appealed this determination. In Breen v.

Coleman v. District of Columbia

828 F. Supp. 2d 87 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 7, 2011

The notice further stated that a trial would take place before a FEMS Fire Trial Board (“Trial Board”). Id. … Code § 7-1131.05); Singletary v. District of Columbia, 685 F. Supp. 2d 81, 90-91 (D.D.C. 2010) (holding the District of Columbia Board of Parole to be a final policy maker).

Capitol Hill Rest. Soc. v. DC ZON. ADJ. BD.

534 A.2d 939 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1987

National Black Child Development Institute, Inc. v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 483 A.2d 687, 690 (D.C.1984); Roumel v. … District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 384 A.2d 674, 677 (D.C.1978); Taylor v.

Hotel Employees Local No. 255 v. Leedom

249 F.2d 506 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 24, 1957

See N.L.R.B. v. Denver Bldg. … The only case in which the Board's refusal to exercise jurisdiction over an entire industry has been reviewed is Office Employes v.

McGrady v. Winter

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 22, 2009

Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 280 (1994). … Dep’t of Interior v. Klamath Water Users Protective Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1, 8-9 (2001) (quoting NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 150 (1975) (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Public Citizen, Inc. v.

National Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Northeast Airlines, Inc., Hughes Tool Company, Northeast Airlines Master Executive Council, Alpa, International Association of MacHinists Intervenors. Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Northeast Airlines, Inc., Hughes Tool Company, Northeast Airlines Master Executive Council, Alpa, International Association of MacHinists Intervenors

306 F.2d 753 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 24, 1962

306 F.2d 753 NATIONAL AIRLINES, INC., Petitioner, v. … EASTERN AIR LINES, INC., Petitioner, v.

In Re Rosenbleet

592 A.2d 1036 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 1991

See generally United States v. Goldblatt, 813 F.2d 619, 623-624 (3d Cir.1987). We also hold that second-degree fraud under the District of Columbia Code includes, as an essential element, an intent to defraud. … Within certain limits imposed by case law and by rule, the choice of an appropriate sanction in a given case is discretionary with the court or the Board.

Belsinger Signs, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

231 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 1964

This Court does not have jurisdiction over these matters since Congress has expressly preempted these actions for the National Labor Relations Board. See United Electrical Radio & Machine Workers of America v. … In addition, this complaint is now pending before the National Labor Relations Board and a hearing is scheduled for August 17, 1964.

Hall v. Department of Defense

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 2021

Rossello v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 1181, 1185 (D.C. … Fortunately, however, I need not resolve the appropriate level of deference to the Board’s 3 In U-Ahk-Vroman-Sanchez v.

Bublitz v. Brownlee

309 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 19, 2004

Kidwell v. Dep’t of the Army, Board for Correction of Military Records, 56 F.3d at 284 . … Kidwell v. Dep’t of the Army, Board for Correction of Military Records, 56 F.3d at 286 ; see also Wolfe v.

Hyatt v. Dudas

393 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 13, 2005

In any event, this Court does not have the authority to direct the issuance of a patent, even where it concludes that the Board has erred as a matter of law. See Gould v. … .”); see also Dickinson v.

Charles R. Warren v. United States Parole Commission

659 F.2d 183 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 1, 1981

E. g., Harisiades v. … Menechino v.

Allen v. Carmen

578 F. Supp. 951 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 30, 1983

Co. v. … the Board.

Foster v. Maryland State Savings & Loan Ass'n

590 F.2d 928 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1978

The antitrust laws do not require the defendant to set up the board of surrogate law examiners that would inevitably be required to implement the plaintiffs’ alternative. … Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341, 351 , 63 S.Ct. 307, 314 , 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943); see also Otter Tail Power Co. v. United States, 410 U.S. 366, 372-74 , 93 S.Ct. 1022 , 35 L.Ed.2d 359 (1973).

In Re Subpoena Served Upon the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Secretary of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

967 F.2d 630 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1992

Ass’n v. … Corp. v.

Bender v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

562 A.2d 1205 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 24, 1989

District Unemployment Compensation Board, 350 A.2d 730, 733 (D.C.1976); see McKart v. *1208 United States, 395 U.S. 185, 193 , 89 S.Ct. 1657, 1662 , 23 L.Ed.2d 194 (1969); Myers v. … No. 1581, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. 5, 8 (1968); see also Wallace v. District Unemployment Compensation Board, 294 A.2d 177, 178-79 (D.C.1972).