§

Central Freight Lines, Inc.

179 N.L.R.B. 914 (N.L.R.B. 1969)
Central Freight Lines, Inc.

3 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. N.L.R.B. v. Harbison-Fischer Manufacturing Co.

    304 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times

    No. 19105. June 20, 1962. Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, for petitioner. Karl Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., Harold E. Mueller, Mueller Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON, WISDOM, and BELL, Circuit Judges. GRIFFIN B. BELL, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board here seeks enforcement of its order against Harbison-Fischer

  3. Sowers Mfg. Co. v. Keck

    33 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1929)

    No. 3967. June 21, 1929. Appeal from District Court of the United States for Eastern District of Pennsylvania; Oliver B. Dickinson, Judge. In the suit of William G. Keck, trading as Keck Bro., against the Bethlehem Motors Corporation, in which a receiver was appointed and in which afterwards the bank creditors' committee was made an intervening complainant and Charles C. Norris, Jr., was appointed substitute receiver, the Sowers Manufacturing Company filed a petition praying that receiver be required