3 Cited authorities
Southern S.S. Co. v. Labor Board
316 U.S. 31 (1942) Cited 160 times 2 Legal AnalysesFinding an abuse of discretion where the National Labor Relations Board sought to fulfill one congressional objective but “wholly ignore[d] other and equally important Congressional objectives”
National Labor Board v. Shirlington Supermkt
224 F.2d 649 (4th Cir. 1955) Cited 18 timesNo. 6968. Argued May 23, 1955. Decided July 25, 1955. Fannie M. Boyls, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Chicago, Ill., David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Ruth V. Reel, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Joseph F. Castiello, Washington, D.C. (Nathaniel Goldberg and Martin J. Kirsch, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for respondent. Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER
Southern S.S. Co. v. National Labor Rel. Board
120 F.2d 505 (3d Cir. 1941) Cited 9 timesNo. 7435. May 6, 1941. Petition to Review and Set Aside an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the Southern Steamship Company to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board. Order modified, and, as so modified, affirmed. Joseph W. Henderson and Randolph W. Childs, both of Philadelphia, Pa. (Adams, Childs, McKaig Lukens and Rawle Henderson, all of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for petitioner. Thomas I. Emerson, of Washington, D.C. (Charles Fahy, Gen