Case law

Lubow v. United States Department of State

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 10, 2010

Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, 560 F. Supp. 2d 21, 23 (D.D.C. 2008); accord Ethyl Corp. v. Browner, 989 F.2d 522, 524 (D.C. Cir. 1993); see also Citizens Against the Pellissippi Parkway Extension, Inc. v. … Power & Light Co. v.

Washington v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.

330 F. Supp. 3d 232 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 7, 2018

Brown's participation was improper, she suggests, because she had previously filed a claim of harassment against Brown with WMATA's Office of Employee Relations in January 2015. See id. ¶¶ 24-27, 64. … Similarly, in Evans v.

Bolger v. Marshall, Secretary of National Defense

193 F.2d 37 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 15, 1951

Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 1938, 303 U.S. 41, 50 , 58 S.Ct. 459, 463 , 82 L.Ed. 638 . … We do not say, of course, that the Army Discharge Review Board can or should grant the relief sought in the District Court. These are matters for determination in the first instance by that Board and not by us. Myers v.

Crease v. Parker

6 F. Cas. 791 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · Nov 15, 1807

He also inclined to the opinion that the acknowledgment to Harris was a fact from which the jury might infer an express promise by the defendant subsequent to his emancipation, and before the suit brought See Williams v. … Brown, 3 Bos. & P. 72, Heath, J.’s, opinion.

Corning Glass Works v. Lucas

37 F.2d 798 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 2, 1929

We therefore affirm the Board on this branch of the ease. … W. 1065 ; Sherman Center Town Co. v. Russell, 46 Kan. 382 , 26 P. 715 ; Whetstone v. Ottawa University, 13 Kan. 320 ; Vandall v. South San Francisco Dock Co., 40 Cal. 83 ; B. S. Green Co. v.

Glascoe v. Miletich

83 A.2d 587 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 3, 1951

As was said by us in Mitchell v. … Creighton v. Brown, D.C.Mun.App., 77 A.2d 559 ; Lippincott v. Kerr, 59 App.D.C. 290 , 40 F.2d 802 ; Robertson v. Ramsay, 54 App.D.C. 346 , 298 F. 557 . Affirmed.

Davis v. United States

390 A.2d 976 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 1978

On July 19, an unidentified man came out of 1844 Kalorama Road and deposited a brown paper bag in a trash can in front of 1862 Kalorama Road. … Lerner v.

United States v. Opportunity Fund & Tiger Eye Investments, Ltd.

613 F.3d 1122 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 16, 2010

See Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61, 86 , 94 S.Ct. 937 , 39 L.Ed.2d 166 (1974); United States v. … City of Chicago v. Envtl. Def. Fund, 511 U.S. 328, 337 , 114 S.Ct. 1588 , 128 L.Ed.2d 302 (1994); see also Exxon Mobil Corp. v.

Friedman v. U.S. Secret Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 2, 2014

COLUMBIA ________________________________ ) DONALD FRIEDMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. … DATE: January 2, 2014 /s/ KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge

Garey's v. Union Bank of Georgetown

10 F. Cas. 1 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · Dec 15, 1827

Renner, who made the' application to the board, must have known it, if it existed; at least, it is strange if he did not. … Garey was confessed in December term, 1817, and the decision of the Court which caused this alarm to the banks was not until the 11th of June, 1818, in the case of Beeding v. Pic, ( 2 Cranch, C. C. 152 .)

Pfizer Inc. v. Heckler

735 F.2d 1502 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 1, 1984

Philips’ Gloeilampenfabrieken v. … These cases were consolidated on appeal. . 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395f(b), 1395x(v)(1)(A), 1396a(a)(30) (1976 & Supp. V 1981). . Id. § 1395x(v)(1)(A). .

Coates v. District of Columbia

42 App. D.C. 194 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 1914

Brown v. District of Columbia, 29 App. D. C. 273, 282, 25 L.R.A. (N.S.) 98; District of Columbia v. Tyrrell, 41 App. D. C. 463. … Corp. 5th ed. § 1642; Bryant v. St. Paul, 33 Minn. 289 , 53 Am. Rep. 31 , 23 N. W. 220 ; Mitchell v. Rockland, 52 Mo. 118, 121 ; Lynde v. Rockland, 66 Me. 309, 315 ; Ogg v. Lansing, 35 Iowa, 495, 498 , 14 Am.

Congress of Railway Unions v. Hodgson

326 F. Supp. 68 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 30, 1971

International Association of Machinists v. National Mediation Board, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 96 , 425 F.2d 527 (1970). … V.

McCord v. Cephas

532 F.2d 1377 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 24, 1976

We reverse the Benefits Review Board because its decision is based on an approach inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s reading of the scope of § 22 in O'Keeffe v. … The Benefits Review Board took the view that though § 22 authorizes modification, it does not authorize nullification of existing awards. They also, citing Crowell v.

Cox v. Headley

265 F. 981 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 3, 1920

Tlje Board further found that Cox had not shown that his combination was susceptible of being substituted in machines of the prior art. … Podlesak v. McInnerney, 26 App. D. C. 399; Sobey v. Holsclaw, 28 App. D. C. 65; Miel v. Young, 29 App. D. C. 481; Kirby v. Clements, 44 App. D. C. 12; Seymour v. Molyneux (present term) 271 O. G. 688 .

Durphy v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Mid-Atlantic States, Inc.

698 A.2d 459 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 1997

District of Columbia v. Brown, 589 A.2d 384 , 389 n. 1 (D.C.1991) (citing Restatement (Second) of Toets § 466, comment f (1965); Mitchell, 533 A.2d at 639 ). … See id,.; District of Columbia v. Brown, 589 A.2d 384, 389 (D.C.1991); see also Weinstock v.

Velikonja, Maria v. Gonzales, Alberto

466 F.3d 122 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 17, 2006

Dover, Attorney.  2 Before: TATEL and BROWN, Circuit Judges, and EDWARDS, Senior Circuit Judge. Opinion for the court filed Per Curiam. … See Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 457 (D.C. Cir. 1999).

Northampton Media Associates v. Federal Communications Commission, Cutter Broadcasting, Inc., Intervenor

941 F.2d 1214 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 24, 1991

In tracking agency policy, we have relied on Board decisions as well as those of the Commission. See Ventura Broadcasting Co. v. … FCC, 765 F.2d 184 , 191-93 (D.C.Cir.1985) (remanding where Commission failed to explain its departure from Review Board precedent); West Michigan Broadcasting Co. v.

Cohen v. Warner Chilcott Public Ltd.

522 F. Supp. 2d 105 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2007

See Final Mem. at 5-6, Ex. 1 (10/2/07 Brown Decl.) (hereinafter “Brown Deck”). … Brown Decl. ¶ 15.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Washington Terminal Company

473 F.2d 1156 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 26, 1973

Ry. v. … Co. v. IBEW, Civ. No. S-1699 (E.D.Cal., July 9, 1970). 24 . The term “Public Law Board” is not used in the statute but refers generally to those special boards of adjustment authorized by 45 U.S.C. § 153 , Second.