§

Ducane Heating Corp.

254 N.L.R.B. 112 (N.L.R.B. 1981)
Ducane Heating Corp.

12 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Nixon

    418 U.S. 683 (1974)   Cited 4,152 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding appeal of District Court's denial of motion to quash subpoena duces tecum was in the Court of Appeals for purposes of § 1254

  2. United States v. Nobles

    422 U.S. 225 (1975)   Cited 2,162 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that counsel's attempt to make testimonial use of work product materials at criminal trial waived protection

  3. Jencks v. United States

    353 U.S. 657 (1957)   Cited 1,103 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants are entitled to obtain the prior statements of persons to government agents when those persons are to testify against the defendants at trial

  4. 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.”

  5. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

  6. Labor Board v. Pittsburgh S.S. Co.

    337 U.S. 656 (1949)   Cited 88 times
    Holding "total rejection of an opposed view cannot of itself impugn the integrity or competence of a trier of fact"

  7. United States v. Puco

    453 F.2d 539 (2d Cir. 1971)   Cited 68 times
    Concluding that narcotics convictions are not highly relevant to the issue of veracity

  8. Elec. Products Div. of Midland-Ross v. N.L.R.B

    617 F.2d 977 (3d Cir. 1980)   Cited 27 times
    In Electrical Products Division of Midland-Ross Corp. v. NLRB, 617 F.2d 977, 987 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 871, 101 S.Ct. 210, 66 L.Ed.2d 91 (1980), we referred to three elements as usually found in these cases where we enforced a Gissel II order: effect of the unfair labor practices on a significant portion of the bargaining unit, the participation of senior company officials, and the continuing impact of the same factors that undermined the first election.

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Lantz

    607 F.2d 290 (9th Cir. 1979)   Cited 15 times

    No. 78-2399. October 29, 1979. R. Michael Smith, NLRB, Washington, D.C., argued, for petitioner; Elliott Moore, NLRB, Washington, D.C., on brief. A. Stevenson Bogue, Nelson, Harding, Yeutter, Leonard Tate, Lincoln, Neb., for respondent. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before HUFSTEDLER and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and GRANT, District Judge. Senior United States District Judge Robert A. Grant, Northern District of Indiana, sitting by designation.

  10. Ridgewood Management Company v. N.L.R.B

    410 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1969)   Cited 11 times

    No. 26151. March 21, 1969. Rehearing Denied and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 13, 1969. John H. Benckenstein, Lipscomb Norvell, Jr., of Benckenstein Norvell, Beaumont, Tex., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Herbert Fishgold, Leonard M. Wagman, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before AINSWORTH and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges, and MITCHELL, District Judge. AINSWORTH, Circuit Judge: This

  11. Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 151   Cited 5,091 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"