B.V.D. Co., Inc.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
  2. Howell Chev. Co. v. Labor Board

    346 U.S. 482 (1953)   Cited 38 times
    Holding that a car retailer is subject to Commerce Clause as an "'integral part' of General Motors' national system of distribution."
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Howell Chevrolet Co.

    204 F.2d 79 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 53 times
    In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Howell Chevrolet Co., 204 F.2d 79, 86 (9th Cir. 1953), we recognized that "carriage, behavior, bearing, manner and appearance of a witness, — his demeanor, —" may cause the trier of fact to reject uncontradicted testimony.
  4. N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co.

    351 F.2d 693 (8th Cir. 1965)   Cited 33 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co., 8 Cir., 351 F.2d 693, also decided since this case was submitted, this court stated that if the factual conclusion of the Board is based upon substantial evidence on the whole record, this court must accept such factual determination as binding. Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B., 8 Cir., 354 F.2d 432, decided December 29, 1965, adheres to these principles.
  5. N.L.R.B. v. Solo Cup Company

    237 F.2d 521 (8th Cir. 1956)   Cited 40 times

    No. 15524. October 18, 1956. Rehearing Denied November 16, 1956. Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief), for petitioner. John J. Hasburgh, Kansas City, Mo. (Carl E. Enggas and Watson S. Marshall Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., were with him on the brief), for respondent. Before WOODROUGH

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nabors

    196 F.2d 272 (5th Cir. 1952)   Cited 37 times

    No. 13526. April 29, 1952. Rehearing Denied June 6, 1952. Owsley Vose, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, all of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Martin Dies, Sr., Lufkin, Tex., for respondent. Before HOLMES, BORAH, and STRUM, Circuit Judges. STRUM, Circuit Judge. `This is a petition to enforce, and a cross petition to set aside, an order of the National Labor Relations Board, issued April 19, 1950, pursuant to Sec. 10(c) of the National Labor Relations

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Des Moines Foods, Inc.

    296 F.2d 285 (8th Cir. 1961)   Cited 20 times

    No. 16694. November 29, 1961. Leo N. McGuire, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. made argument for petitioner. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer, Atty., and Leo N. McGuire, Atty., NLRB, Washington, D.C. were on the brief. Hobart E. Newton, Stuart, Iowa, made argument for respondent, and was on the brief. Before SANBORN, MATTHES and RIDGE, Circuit Judges. SANBORN

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wallick

    198 F.2d 477 (3d Cir. 1952)   Cited 27 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Wallick, 198 F.2d 477 (3 Cir. 1952), that court sustained a Board order requiring a respondent partnership which operated several enterprises engaged in the manufacture of ladies' garments to either reopen a plant which it had closed in violation of the Act because its employees had organized or give its employees an opportunity to work in other plants operated by the partnership.
  9. Nachman Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    337 F.2d 421 (7th Cir. 1964)   Cited 11 times

    No. 14566. October 7, 1964. Fredric N. Richman, Sidney R. Korshak, David H. Mendelsohn, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, George H. Cohen, Atty., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison, Seymour Strongin, Attys., N.L.R.B., for respondent. Before DUFFY, SCHNACKENBERG and KILEY, Circuit Judges. DUFFY, Circuit Judge. This is a petition by Nachman Corporation to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations

  10. O.F. Shearer Sons v. Cincinnati Marine Serv

    279 F.2d 68 (6th Cir. 1960)   Cited 13 times

    No. 13949. May 31, 1960. Robert T. Keeler, Cincinnati, Ohio (Nicholas L. White, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellant. Philip S. Olinger, Cincinnati, Ohio (Earl T. Barnes, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellee. Before SIMONS, POPE and O'SULLIVAN, Circuit Judges. POPE, Circuit Judge. Appellant, libellant below, is a partnership which owned and towed barges on the Ohio River. Appellee-respondent is a corporation which owns and manages a harbor in the Cincinnati basin area of the Ohio