Flat Dog Productions

6 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.
369 U.S. 404 (1962) Cited 298 times
Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"
SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.
397 U.S. 920 (1970) Cited 200 times 5 Legal Analyses
Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances
Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B
414 F.2d 99 (7th Cir. 1969) Cited 81 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list
Vulcan Hart Corp.
718 F.2d 269 (8th Cir. 1983) Cited 44 times
Holding “Rule 408 excludes evidence of settlement offers only if such evidence is offered to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim under negotiation”
Abilities and Goodwill, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
612 F.2d 6 (1st Cir. 1979) Cited 22 times 1 Legal Analyses
Listing factors to be considered when determining whether concerted action is protected
Teamsters, Chauffeurs Helpers v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 1011 (D.C. Cir. 1963) Cited 22 times
No. 16415. Argued November 12, 1963. Decided December 5, 1963. Mr. L.N.D. Wells, Jr., Dallas, Tex., with whom Mr. David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Hugh Hafer, Seattle, Wash., also entered an appearance for petitioner. Mr. Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Messrs. Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., were on the brief, for respondent. Mr. Alexander E. Wilson, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., with whom

Flat Dog Productions

6 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.

Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances

Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B

Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list

Vulcan Hart Corp.

Holding “Rule 408 excludes evidence of settlement offers only if such evidence is offered to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim under negotiation”

Abilities and Goodwill, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

Listing factors to be considered when determining whether concerted action is protected

Teamsters, Chauffeurs Helpers v. N.L.R.B