Gestamp South Carolina, LLC

13 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. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Yeshiva University

    444 U.S. 672 (1980)   Cited 183 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that all faculty members are managers for purposes of federal labor law even though they lack any legal instruments of control
  4. 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
  5. Grandison v. U.S.

    495 U.S. 934 (1990)   Cited 53 times

    No. 89-6673. May 14, 1990. C.A. 4TH Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 885 F.2d 143.

  6. Gomez-Garcia v. Sessions

    861 F.3d 730 (8th Cir. 2017)   Cited 7 times
    Affirming the BIA's conclusion that the applicant's political affiliation was not central because "[t]here [was] no evidence in the record that MS-13 threatened [the applicants] before they reported [the gang's] burglary"
  7. S F Market St. Healthcare LLC v. N.L.R.B

    570 F.3d 354 (D.C. Cir. 2009)   Cited 10 times

    No. 07-1439, 07-1502. Argued November 17, 2008. Decided June 30, 2009. John H. Douglas argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioner. Amy H. Ginn, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Ronald E. Meisburg, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Linda Dreeben, Deputy Associate General Counsel, and Jill A. Griffin, Supervisory Attorney. Meredith L. Jason and Jason Walta, Attorneys, entered appearances. Before:

  8. Palace Sports Entm't, Inc. v. NLRB

    411 F.3d 212 (D.C. Cir. 2005)   Cited 6 times

    No. 04-1261, 04-1276. Argued March 18, 2005. Decided May 31, 2005. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Robert M. Vercruysse argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Gary S. Fealk. David A. Fleischer, Senior Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Assistant General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong

  9. Kamtech, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    314 F.3d 800 (6th Cir. 2002)   Cited 5 times

    Nos. 01-1391, 01-1558. Submitted: August 7, 2002. Decided and Filed: September 4, 2002. This decision was originally issued as an "unpublished decision" filed on September 4, 2002. On December 3, 2002, the court designated the opinion as one recommended for full-text publication. Appeal from the Court of Appeals, Daughtrey, Circuit Judge. J. Roy Weathersby, Eric K. Smith (briefed), Littler Mendelson, Atlanta, GA, for Petitioner Cross-Respondent. Ailen A. Armstrong, Dep.Asso.Gen.Counsel, National

  10. Electronic Data Systems Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    985 F.2d 801 (5th Cir. 1993)   Cited 4 times

    No. 92-4391. March 12, 1993. Frank W. Buck, David A. Posner, Duvin, Cahn Barnard, Cleveland, OH, and Martin T. Wymer, Deputy Gen. Counsel, Electronic Data Systems Corp., Dallas, TX, for petitioners. Margaret G. Bezou, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputies Assoc. Gen. Counsel, and Howard E. Perlstein, Sup. Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, for respondent. Michael Dunn, Director, Region 16 N.L.R.B., Ft. Worth, TX, for other interested parties. Petitions for Review of Order of National Labor Relations Board

  11. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,213 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”