§

EURO BUILDERS, LTD.

09-CA-106788 (N.L.R.B. Oct. 24, 2014)
EURO BUILDERS, LTD.

13 Cited authorities

  1. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,674 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  3. Director, Off. of Work. Comp. v. Greenwich Collieries

    512 U.S. 267 (1994)   Cited 445 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under the Administrative Procedure Act, the burden of proof encompasses the burden of persuasion; when the evidence is evenly balanced, the party with the burden must lose

  4. National Labor Rel. B. v. Kentucky R. Comm. C

    532 U.S. 706 (2001)   Cited 180 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the burden of proving a statutory exception generally falls on the party who claims a benefit

  5. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board

    313 U.S. 177 (1941)   Cited 871 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

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

    301 F.3d 83 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 49 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding issue not exhausted where the "tenor" of petitioner's objection to the Board was "purely factual," but the tenor of the objection on appeal was legal

  8. N.L.R.B. v. General Fabrications Corp.

    222 F.3d 218 (6th Cir. 2000)   Cited 25 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding the NLRB is entitled to summary enforcement of unchallenged portions of orders

  9. Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 56 times
    Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination

  10. Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B

    760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

  11. Section 1926.451 - General requirements

    29 C.F.R. § 1926.451   Cited 79 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Establishing safety requirements for scaffolds