Stephen Millard, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

6 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,627 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,622 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"
Cygnar v. City of Chicago
865 F.2d 827 (7th Cir. 1989) Cited 168 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that evidence that patronage targets' names were known by defendant to be on Democratic Party contributors' list sufficient to support finding that defendant knew, despite his denial, of their political affiliations
Williamson v. Handy Button Mach. Co.
817 F.2d 1290 (7th Cir. 1987) Cited 162 times
Holding that plaintiff's failure to ask for prejudgment interest until after the verdict had been returned is not dispositive of the issue as to whether plaintiff is entitled to it
Maurer v. United States
668 F.2d 98 (2d Cir. 1981) Cited 39 times
Holding that "a defendant causing a subsequent injury is entitled to have the plaintiff's damages discounted to reflect the proportion of damages that would have been suffered even in the absence of the subsequent injury"
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. ALC Security Investigations, Ltd.
823 F. Supp. 571 (N.D. Ill. 1993) Cited 10 times
Finding injunctive relief proper because the jury concluded there was a violation of the law and it was clear from the testimony at trial that the defendant still believed that its conduct was proper

Stephen Millard, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

6 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

Pullman-Standard v. Swint

Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"

Cygnar v. City of Chicago

Holding that evidence that patronage targets' names were known by defendant to be on Democratic Party contributors' list sufficient to support finding that defendant knew, despite his denial, of their political affiliations

Williamson v. Handy Button Mach. Co.

Holding that plaintiff's failure to ask for prejudgment interest until after the verdict had been returned is not dispositive of the issue as to whether plaintiff is entitled to it

Maurer v. United States

Holding that "a defendant causing a subsequent injury is entitled to have the plaintiff's damages discounted to reflect the proportion of damages that would have been suffered even in the absence of the subsequent injury"

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. ALC Security Investigations, Ltd.

Finding injunctive relief proper because the jury concluded there was a violation of the law and it was clear from the testimony at trial that the defendant still believed that its conduct was proper