14 Cited authorities
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 652 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 357 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Frankl v. HTH Corp.
693 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 31 timesHolding that employer withheld requested documents in bad faith where union repeatedly explained why limited production was inadequate and where union signed confidentiality agreement to address employer’s concerns
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Grand Canyon Mining Co.
116 F.3d 1039 (4th Cir. 1997) Cited 36 times 1 Legal AnalysesNo. 96-1990, 96-2089. Argued May 7, 1997. Decided June 27, 1997. On Application for Enforcement and Cross-Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. (11-CA-15801, 11-CA-16059). ARGUED: Jeffrey Lawrence Horowitz, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Matthew Woodruff Sawchak, SMITH, HELMS, MULLISS MOORE, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Frederick L. Feinstein, General Counsel, Linda Sher, Associate General Counsel, Aileen
Autonation, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
801 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2015) Cited 7 timesFinding employer's claim that it fired employee due to job abandonment to be a pretext because employer knew that employee had filed for unemployment benefits and was under the impression that he had already been terminated and yet the company did nothing to correct the employee's alleged misimpression
Davis Supermarkets, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
2 F.3d 1162 (D.C. Cir. 1993) Cited 30 times 1 Legal AnalysesAffirming bargaining order where company's "large number of unfair labor practices, . . . committed by some of the top officials in the company, and . . . directed at numerous employees . . . instilled a strong fear of union representation in the employees."
Abbey's Transp. Services, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
837 F.2d 575 (2d Cir. 1988) Cited 25 timesFinding violation when interrogator was a "lawyer-consultant"
Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966) Cited 56 timesUpholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination
N.L.R.B. v. Homer D. Bronson Co.
273 F. App'x 32 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 1 times 1 Legal AnalysesNo. 07-2447-ag. April 10, 2008. Application of the National Labor Relations Board for the enforcement of its Order, dated March 16, 2007, against Homer D. Bronson Company. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the application is GRANTED. Robert J. Englehart, Supervisory Attorney, Ruth E. Burdick, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, (Ronald Meisburg, General Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Linda
N.L.R.B. v. Regional Home Care Services, Inc.
237 F.3d 62 (1st Cir. 2001) Cited 5 timesHolding that the Court is limited to determining whether the Board acted within its discretion in the conduct of elections