George P. Bailey & Sons, Inc.

6 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. 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
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Adco Electric Inc.

    6 F.3d 1110 (5th Cir. 1993)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that employee "recommend[ing] someone for hire and [bringing] problems with apprentice employees to the attention of [his superior] is nothing more than what [the employer] would expect from experienced employees"
  4. Marshall Durbin Poultry Co. v. N.L.R.B

    39 F.3d 1312 (5th Cir. 1994)   Cited 13 times

    No. 93-4057. December 16, 1994. Sidney F. Lewis, Henry T. Arrington, Kullman, Inman, Bee, Downing Banta, New Orleans, LA, for appellant. William Baudler, Aileen Armstrong, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Paul J. Spielberg N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, for appellee. Hugh Frank Malone, Regional Director, N.L.R.B., Region 15, New Orleans, LA, for other Interested Parties. Petition for Review and Cross Application for Enforcement of a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board. Before REAVLEY, GARWOOD

  5. Tel Data Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    90 F.3d 1195 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 5 times
    Sustaining finding of unlawful motivation in part because "in contrast to other employees when confronted [with the same misconduct], Frederick, a nine-year employee with no history of disciplinary problems, was given no opportunity to explain his actions before his termination"
  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Universal Camera

    179 F.2d 749 (2d Cir. 1950)   Cited 24 times

    No. 54, Docket 21395. Argued December 6, 1949. Decided January 10, 1950. A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ruth Weyand, Asst. Gen. Counsel, William J. Avrutis, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Kaye, Scholer, Fierman Hays, New York City, Frederick R. Livingston, New York City, for respondent. On petition of the National Labor Relations Board for an order, "enforcing" an order of the Board to "cease