§

Galveston Maritime Association, Inc.

122 N.L.R.B. 692 (N.L.R.B. 1958)
Galveston Maritime Association, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Remington Rand, Inc.

    94 F.2d 862 (2d Cir. 1938)   Cited 178 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 94 F.2d 862, 869, the Board had ordered the employer to deal exclusively with a joint board which had brought the unfair labor practice charges involved in that case.

  2. National Labor Rel. Board v. Hopwood Retinning

    104 F.2d 302 (2d Cir. 1939)   Cited 41 times
    In NLRB v. Hopwood Retinning Co., 104 F.2d 302 (2d Cir. 1939), the employer had locked out and discharged employees because of their union activity.

  3. National Labor Rel. v. Broderick Wood

    261 F.2d 548 (10th Cir. 1958)   Cited 16 times
    In NLRB v. Broderick Wood Prod. Co., 10 Cir., 261 F.2d 548, 556, it was said: "Here, the union-security clause was the very basis for the charge of unfair labor practices. It was the union-security clause that Teamsters were enforcing when demanding that the employees be discharged.

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. George D. Auchter

    209 F.2d 273 (5th Cir. 1954)   Cited 21 times

    No. 14537. January 15, 1954. A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elizabeth W. Weston, Atty., David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, George J. Bott, General Counsel, Dean E. Denlinger, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Edwin C. Coffee, Harry G. Kincaid, Jacksonville, Fla., Knight, Walrath, Kincaid Young, Jacksonville, Fla., Coffee Coffee, Jacksonville, Fla., for respondent Carpenters Dist. Council of Jacksonville and Vicinity. Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge

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

    202 F.2d 511 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 22 times

    No. 13303. February 17, 1953. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Finding, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elizabeth W. Weston and Abraham Siegel, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Gardiner Johnson, Thomas E. Stanton, Jr., San Francisco, Cal., for respondents Swinerton, Jabez Burns Sons, and others. Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and HEALY and ORR, Circuit Judges. ORR, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of an order requiring

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lummus Co.

    210 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1954)   Cited 20 times

    No. 14520. February 12, 1954. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Elmer Davis, Chief Law Officer, N.L.R.B., Fort Worth, Tex., Frederick U. Reel, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Dean E. Denlinger, Atty., N.L.R.B., Dayton, Ohio, for petitioner. Quentin Keith, Cecil, Keith Mehaffy, Beaumont, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and BORAH and RIVES, Circuit Judges. BORAH, Circuit

  7. Poole Foundry Mach. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    192 F.2d 740 (4th Cir. 1951)   Cited 20 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Poole the court upheld the Board's bargaining order, concluding that the employer's withdrawal of recognition of the union based on a decertification petition signed by sixty-four of sixty-six employees within four months of the employer's settlement agreement with the union violated section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act.

  8. National Labor Bd. v. Waterfront Employers

    211 F.2d 946 (9th Cir. 1954)   Cited 17 times

    No. 13671. April 6, 1954. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Arnold Ordman Margaret M. Farmer, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Bogle, Bogle Gates, Edward G. Dobrin, J. Tyler Hull, Zabel Poth, Philip J. Poth, Bassett Geisness, Seattle, Wash., Gladstein, Andersen Leonard, San Francisco, Cal., for appellees. Before HEALY and BONE, Circuit Judges and LEMMON, District Judge. BONE, Circuit Judge. The National

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hopwood R. Co.

    98 F.2d 97 (2d Cir. 1938)   Cited 32 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Hopwood Retinning Co., 98 F.2d 97, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit based its conclusion that a company engaged in repairing milk and ice cream containers was engaged in "interstate commerce" within the meaning of the Act upon the fact that 23% of the containers on which work was to be done were transported in the company's truck from and to states other than the state where the work was performed.