§

Elliott-Williams Co., Inc.

143 N.L.R.B. 811 (N.L.R.B. 1963)
Elliott-Williams Co., Inc.

19 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 506 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"

  2. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 317 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  3. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  4. Labor Board v. Bradford Dyeing Assn

    310 U.S. 318 (1940)   Cited 150 times
    Construing "affecting commerce"

  5. Joy Silk Mills v. National Labor Rel. Board

    185 F.2d 732 (D.C. Cir. 1950)   Cited 162 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Joy Silk the Court held that when an employer could have no doubt as to the majority status or when an employer refuses recognition of a union "due to a desire to gain time and to take action to dissipate the union's majority, the refusal is no longer justifiable and constitutes a violation of the duty to bargain set forth in section 8(a)(5) of the Act".

  6. Ohio Power Co. v. N.L.R.B

    176 F.2d 385 (6th Cir. 1949)   Cited 64 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plain and unambiguous text must be applied as written without resort to construction

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kobritz

    193 F.2d 8 (1st Cir. 1951)   Cited 43 times
    Upholding an NLRB departure from a policy of declining to assert jurisdiction, on the ground that "the Board had jurisdiction all the time"

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Edward G. Budd Mfg. Co.

    169 F.2d 571 (6th Cir. 1948)   Cited 46 times
    In NLRB v. Budd Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 571, 577 (6th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 905, 69 S.Ct. 411, 93 L.Ed. 441 (1949), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals specifically rejected the notion that the protection afforded by the National Labor Relations Act is a constitutional right.

  9. National Lbr. Rel. Bd. v. Piqua M. W. Prod

    109 F.2d 552 (6th Cir. 1940)   Cited 28 times
    In N. L. R. B. v. Piqua Munising Wood Products Co., 109 F.2d 552, 557, the United States Circuit Court said: "All that is requisite in a valid complaint before the Board is that there be a plain statement of the things claimed to constitute an unfair labor practice that respondent may be put upon his defense."

  10. Iob v. Los Angeles Brewing Co.

    183 F.2d 398 (9th Cir. 1950)   Cited 14 times

    No. 12247. June 21, 1950. Henry B. Ely, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. O'Melveny Myers, W.B. Carman, Jr., and W.W. Alsup, all of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee, Los Angeles Brewing Co. P.H. McCarthy, Jr., F. Nason O'Hara and Herbert S. Johnson, all of San Francisco, Cal., for other appellees. Before STEPHENS, ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges. STEPHENS, Circuit Judge. Appellants Iob, Dobbs and Ullrich are ex-servicemen who claim to have been deprived of reemployment rights guaranteed to them as World