Black���s Railroad Transit Service
4 Cited authorities
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 358 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Uforma/Shelby Business Forms, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
111 F.3d 1284 (6th Cir. 1997) Cited 96 timesHolding that "Rule 408 does not exclude evidence of alleged threats to retaliate for protected activity when the statements occurred during negotiations focused on the protected activity and the evidence serves to prove liability either for making, or later acting upon, the threats" because the evidence was not introduced in order to prove the validity of the grievance which served as the subject of the negotiations
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hicks Oils & Hicksgas, Inc.
942 F.2d 1140 (7th Cir. 1991) Cited 3 timesNo. 89-2795. Argued January 14, 1991. Decided September 4, 1991. Barbara A. Atkin, Judith P. Flower, N.L.R.B., Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, William A. Baudler (argued), N.L.R.B., Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, D.C., Joseph H. Solien, N.L.R.B., Region 14, St. Louis, Mo., for petitioner. Gary A. Wincek (argued), William L. Becker, Laner, Muchin, Dombrow, Becker, Levin Tominberg, Chicago, Ill., Nancy M. Watkins, Wilburn, Suggs Watkins, St. Louis, Mo., for respondent
Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations
Fed. R. Evid. 408 Cited 4,477 times 50 Legal AnalysesHolding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)