§

Brewery Worker Union No.8, Etc.

148 N.L.R.B. 728 (N.L.R.B. 1964)
Brewery Worker Union No.8, Etc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council

    341 U.S. 675 (1951)   Cited 494 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

  2. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 507 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

  3. Labor Board v. Fruit Packers

    377 U.S. 58 (1964)   Cited 236 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRA section 8(b)(B) does not prohibit "peaceful picketing . . . limited . . . to persuading Safeway customers not to buy Washington State apples when they traded in Safeway stores"

  4. Steelworkers v. Labor Board

    376 U.S. 492 (1964)   Cited 75 times
    Stating that section 8(b) prohibits labor unions from engaging in "secondary boycotting" by "exert[ing] pressure on an employer not involved in the relevant labor dispute ('the secondary employer') in order to obtain a favorable result in the ongoing labor dispute with another employer ('the primary employer')"

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bus. Mach

    228 F.2d 553 (2d Cir. 1955)   Cited 67 times
    In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Business Mach. etc., CIO (228 F.2d 553) the Circuit Court of Appeals for this circuit declared (p. 559) that "The only thing proscribed by § 8(b)(4) is inducement or encouragement of the employees of the customers".

  6. Douds v. Metropolitan Federation of Architects, Ect.

    75 F. Supp. 672 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)   Cited 51 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Douds v. Metropolitan Federation of Architects, etc., 75 F. Supp. 672 (S.D.N.Y. 1948), the court laid heavy emphasis on the economic effect of the work performed by the ally's employees.

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 810

    299 F.2d 636 (2d Cir. 1962)   Cited 10 times

    No. 123, Docket 27062. Argued January 5, 1962. Decided January 12, 1962. Melvin J. Welles, Attorney, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Solomon I. Hirsh, Attorney, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Herbert S. Thatcher, New York City (Henry Brickman, New York City, and David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., Harry Weinstock, New York City, of counsel), for respondent

  8. United Steelworkers of Am., v. N.L.R.B

    294 F.2d 256 (D.C. Cir. 1961)   Cited 5 times

    No. 15771. Argued March 2, 1961. Decided May 4, 1961. Petition for Reconsideration Denied August 10, 1961. Mr. David E. Feller, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Jerry D. Anker, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioners. Mr. Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Mr. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Mr. Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., and Mr. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., were on the brief, for respondent. Messrs. Louis Sherman, Laurence

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Entwistle Mfg. Co.

    120 F.2d 532 (4th Cir. 1941)   Cited 15 times

    No. 4770. June 10, 1941. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order against the Entwistle Manufacturing Company. Order modified and enforced. Walter B. Wilbur, of Washington, D.C., Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Laurence A. Knapp, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sylvester Garrett, and William Stix, all of Washington, D.C., Attys