§
H. M. Newman

18 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Laughlin

    301 U.S. 1 (1937)   Cited 1,499 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the National Labor Relations Act applied only to interstate commerce, and upholding its constitutionality on that basis

  2. Wickard v. Filburn

    317 U.S. 111 (1942)   Cited 924 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial effect on interstate commerce"

  3. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board

    313 U.S. 177 (1941)   Cited 871 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  4. Virginia Electric Co. v. Board

    319 U.S. 533 (1943)   Cited 326 times
    Stating that the purpose of the Act is to encourage and protect "full freedom of association for workers"

  5. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 317 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  6. Labor Board v. Fainblatt

    306 U.S. 601 (1939)   Cited 281 times
    Upholding NLRA under Commerce Power

  7. National Labor Rel. Board v. Gluek Brewing Co.

    144 F.2d 847 (8th Cir. 1944)   Cited 26 times
    In Glueck, the court recognized that an independent contractor could not be held liable for an unfair labor practice if it was "an entirely innocent and unconscious instrument" of the perpetrator of the practice, but "[w]here an independent contractor knowingly participates in the effectuation of an unfair practice, it places itself within the orbit of the Board's corrective jurisdiction."

  8. McQuay-Norris Mfg. Co. v. Natl. Labor R. Board

    116 F.2d 748 (7th Cir. 1940)   Cited 29 times

    No. 7269. December 23, 1940. Petition for Review of Order of National Labor Relations Board. Proceeding by the McQuay-Norris Manufacturing Company to review an order of the National Labor Relations Board. The Board requested enforcement of its order. Request for enforcement allowed. Barnes, Hickam, Pantzer Boyd and Paul Y. Davis, all of Indianapolis, Ind. (Kurt F. Pantzer, of Indianapolis, Ind., of counsel), for petitioner. Gerhard P. Van Arkel, of Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before EVANS and

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Suburban Lumber Co.

    121 F.2d 829 (3d Cir. 1941)   Cited 27 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Suburban Lumber Co., 3 Cir., 121 F.2d 829 (1941), the de minimis doctrine was urged to defeat the Board's jurisdiction.

  10. Herzfeld v. Federal Trade Commission

    140 F.2d 207 (2d Cir. 1944)   Cited 21 times
    In Herzfeld v. Federal Trade Commission, 2 Cir., 140 F.2d 207, 209, Learned Hand, C.J., pointed out that "the Supreme Court has as much circumscribed our powers to review the decisions of administrative tribunals in point of remedy, as they have always been circumscribed in the review of facts.