§
Aquatech, Inc.

3 Cited authorities

  1. 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 Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  2. M. S. P. Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    568 F.2d 166 (10th Cir. 1977)   Cited 17 times

    No. 76-1100. Argued and Submitted November 18, 1976. Decided December 23, 1977. James E. Hautzinger, Denver, Colo. (Charles W. Newcom of Dawson, Nagel, Sherman Howard, Denver, Colo., on the brief), for petitioner. Andrew F. Tranovich, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (John S. Irving, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Carl L. Taylor, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for respondent. Peggy A. Hillman

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Highland Park Mfg. Co.

    110 F.2d 632 (4th Cir. 1940)   Cited 60 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Highland Park Manufacturing Company, 4 Cir., 110 F.2d 632, 640, decided March 11, 1940, the court, in discussing a similar contention, said: "* * * In such case it is reasonable to presume that the authority of the bargaining agent continues until the contrary be shown [citing cases]."