§

Frank L. Sample, Jr., Inc.

118 N.L.R.B. 1496 (N.L.R.B. 1957)
Frank L. Sample, Jr., Inc.

15 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  2. Amalgamated Workers v. Edison Co.

    309 U.S. 261 (1940)   Cited 211 times
    In Amalgamated Workers v. Edison Co., 309 U.S. 261, we held that the Board had implied authority to institute contempt proceedings for violation of court decrees enforcing orders of the Board.

  3. Labor Board v. Coca-Cola Bot. Co.

    350 U.S. 264 (1956)   Cited 50 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Louisville, 1956, 350 U.S. 264, 76 S.Ct. 383, 384, 100 L.Ed. 285, the Supreme Court rejected the attempted distinction as "too thin a dialectic enterprise".

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Solo Cup Company

    237 F.2d 521 (8th Cir. 1956)   Cited 40 times

    No. 15524. October 18, 1956. Rehearing Denied November 16, 1956. Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief), for petitioner. John J. Hasburgh, Kansas City, Mo. (Carl E. Enggas and Watson S. Marshall Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., were with him on the brief), for respondent. Before WOODROUGH

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nabors

    196 F.2d 272 (5th Cir. 1952)   Cited 37 times

    No. 13526. April 29, 1952. Rehearing Denied June 6, 1952. Owsley Vose, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, all of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Martin Dies, Sr., Lufkin, Tex., for respondent. Before HOLMES, BORAH, and STRUM, Circuit Judges. STRUM, Circuit Judge. `This is a petition to enforce, and a cross petition to set aside, an order of the National Labor Relations Board, issued April 19, 1950, pursuant to Sec. 10(c) of the National Labor Relations

  6. Consumers Power Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    113 F.2d 38 (6th Cir. 1940)   Cited 56 times
    In Consumers Power Co. v. N.L.R.B., 6 Cir., 113 F.2d 38, 41, we considered and rejected the argument that no immediate and direct effect upon interstate commerce follows a labor controversy which curtails the employer's activity when its products are sold to an intervening private agency over whom the employer has no authority or control. It was said in Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. N.L.R.B., 305 U.S. 197, 59 S.Ct. 206, 214, 83 L. Ed. 126, "it is the effect upon interstate or foreign commerce, not the source of the injury, which is the criterion."

  7. Kansas Milling Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    185 F.2d 413 (10th Cir. 1950)   Cited 36 times

    No. 4036. November 9, 1950. Rehearing Denied December 11, 1950. George Siefkin, Wichita, Kan. (Carl T. Smith, Wichita, Kan., on the brief), for petitioner. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, Washington D.C., and Leonard S. Kimmell, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for respondent. Before BRATTON, HUXMAN and PICKETT, Circuit Judges. HUXMAN, Circuit Judge. This case is here on the petition of the Kansas Milling

  8. National Labor Rel. Bd. v. Pyne Molding Corp

    226 F.2d 818 (2d Cir. 1955)   Cited 25 times

    No. 84, Docket 23635. Argued October 5, 1955. Decided October 28, 1955. Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Provost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Arnold Ordman and James A. Ryan, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Morgan P. Ames, Stamford, Conn., for respondent. W.H.F. Millar, Waynesville, N.C., of counsel. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and MEDINA and LUMBARD, Circuit Judges. LUMBARD, Circuit Judge. This petition to enforce

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pecheur Lozenge Co.

    209 F.2d 393 (2d Cir. 1953)   Cited 27 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Pecheur Lozenge Co., 2 Cir., 209 F.2d 393, 403, 404, it was held an unfair labor practice to insist that a strike be called off as a condition of bargaining.

  10. National Labor Rel. Board v. Gen. Shoe Corp.

    192 F.2d 504 (6th Cir. 1951)   Cited 26 times
    Holding similar committee to be labor organization