Answering, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Brown
380 U.S. 278 (1965) Cited 473 times 2 Legal Analyses
Approving finding of § 8 violation when "employers' conduct is demonstrably so destructive of employee rights and so devoid of significant service to any legitimate business end that it cannot be tolerated consistently with the Act"
Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.
369 U.S. 404 (1962) Cited 298 times
Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"
Teamsters Local v. Labor Board
365 U.S. 667 (1961) Cited 174 times
Holding that the Board may not dictate specific procedures and rules that a union must adopt, not that the Board errs when it determines that a union engaged in unfair labor practices by failing to operate in accordance with objective criteria
N.L.R.B. v. Griggs Equipment, Inc.
307 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1962) Cited 52 times
In Griggs, the issue was not even mentioned in the Board's Decision, but is noted in the decision of the court of appeals.
McGraw-Edison Company v. N.L.R.B
419 F.2d 67 (8th Cir. 1969) Cited 33 times
No. 19429. December 4, 1969. Paul S. Kuelthau, of Moller, Talent Kuelthau, St. Louis, for petitioner and filed brief and reply brief. John D. Burgoyne, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, N.L.R.B., and Robertamarie Kiley, Atty., N.L.R.B., were on the brief with Mr. Burgoyne. Charles A. Werner, St. Louis, Mo., for intervenor; Gibson Langsdale, Kansas
Marshfield Steel Company v. N.L.R.B
324 F.2d 333 (8th Cir. 1963) Cited 38 times
No. 17315. November 20, 1963. Ransom A. Ellis, Jr., of Walker, Daniel, Clampett, Rittershouse Ellis, Springfield, Mo., made argument for the petitioner and filed brief. Leo N. McGuire, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., made argument for the respondent and Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Warren M. Davison, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief. Before VOGEL and MATTHES, Circuit Judges, and
Edward Fields, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 754 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 32 times
In Edward Fields, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 325 F.2d 754 (2d Cir. 1963), a vice-president of the company suggested that the employees prepare a petition calling for the return of previously signed union authorization cards and, later, prepared such a petition at the request of one of his employees.
N.L.R.B. v. Super Toys, Inc.
458 F.2d 180 (9th Cir. 1972) Cited 12 times
No. 71-1450. March 29, 1972. Stephen H. Naiman (argued), Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Herman M. Levy, Washington, D.C.; Abraham Siegel, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. David G. Moore (argued) of Reid, Babbage Coil, Riverside, Cal., for respondent. George Pappy, of Brundage, Neyhart, Miller, Ross Reich, Los Angeles, Cal., for the charging party. Before HAMLEY, HUFSTEDLER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges. HUFSTEDLER, Circuit
N.L.R.B. v. Davidson Rubber Company
305 F.2d 166 (1st Cir. 1962) Cited 2 times
No. 5948. July 13, 1962. James C. Paras, Attorney, Washington, D.C., with whom Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Assistant General Counsel, and Robert Sewell, Attorney, Washington, D.C., were on brief, for petitioner. Julius Kirle, Boston, Mass., for respondent. Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and HARTIGAN and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges. HARTIGAN, Circuit Judge. This is a petition by the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dant
207 F.2d 165 (9th Cir. 1953) Cited 9 times
No. 12985. September 15, 1953. George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Asst. Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Norton J. Come, Morris A. Solomon, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Raymond S. Smathurst, Washington, D.C., J.P. Stirling, Roscoe Watts, John T. Casey, Portland, Or., for appellee. Before HEALY, BONE and ORR, Circuit Judges. ORR, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board, hereafter the Board, requests enforcement

Answering, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Approving finding of § 8 violation when "employers' conduct is demonstrably so destructive of employee rights and so devoid of significant service to any legitimate business end that it cannot be tolerated consistently with the Act"

Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

Holding that the Board may not dictate specific procedures and rules that a union must adopt, not that the Board errs when it determines that a union engaged in unfair labor practices by failing to operate in accordance with objective criteria

In Griggs, the issue was not even mentioned in the Board's Decision, but is noted in the decision of the court of appeals.

In Edward Fields, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 325 F.2d 754 (2d Cir. 1963), a vice-president of the company suggested that the employees prepare a petition calling for the return of previously signed union authorization cards and, later, prepared such a petition at the request of one of his employees.