§

Haag Drug Co., Inc.

169 N.L.R.B. 877 (N.L.R.B. 1968)
Haag Drug Co., Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Packard Co. v. Labor Board

    330 U.S. 485 (1947)   Cited 382 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board determinations of unit issues involves a "large measure of informed discretion."

  2. Labor Board v. Metropolitan Ins. Co.

    380 U.S. 438 (1965)   Cited 180 times
    In Metropolitan Ins. Co., supra, at 444, we made it clear that "`courts may not accept appellate counsel's post hoc rationalizations for agency action.'"

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.

    341 F.2d 750 (6th Cir. 1965)   Cited 62 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 341 F.2d 750 (6 Cir. 1965), the court granted enforcement of the Board's order finding the requests for copies of statements to be a violation of Section 8(a)(1).

  4. S.D. Warren Co. v. N.L.R.B

    353 F.2d 494 (1st Cir. 1965)   Cited 23 times

    No. 6452. November 8, 1965. John J. Delaney, Jr., Boston, Mass., with whom Murray S. Freeman, Gordon P. Ramsey, and Nutter, McClennen Fish, Boston, Mass., were on the brief, for petitioner. Leonard M. Wagman, Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., with whom Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Warren M. Davison and Laurence S. Gold, Washington, D.C., Attys., were on the brief, for respondent. Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, MADDEN

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Purity Food Stores

    376 F.2d 497 (1st Cir. 1967)   Cited 20 times
    In Purity Food Stores there were seven supermarkets — employing about 400 employees — all located north of Boston within a 30-mile radius of the company's central office with frequent interchanges of employees.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Frisch's Big Boy Ill-Mar, Inc.

    356 F.2d 895 (7th Cir. 1966)   Cited 20 times
    In Frisch's, this court refused to enforce a Board order finding a single store unit appropriate among ten restaurants in Indianapolis, Indiana. After reviewing the record, we found that the restaurants were a single, integrated enterprise and that each restaurant lacked sufficient autonomy, even though the individual restaurant manager could order supplies and merchandise and could independently hire employees within centrally prescribed wage rates.

  7. Retail, Wholesale, Dept. Store v. N.L.R.B

    385 F.2d 301 (D.C. Cir. 1967)   Cited 12 times
    Non-selling employees, excepting office clericals, found to be an appropriate unit

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Merner Lumber and Hardware Company

    345 F.2d 770 (9th Cir. 1965)   Cited 13 times

    No. 19349. May 10, 1965. Rehearing Denied June 22, 1965. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, William Wachter, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Grant A. Winther, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before HAMLEY, MERRILL and BROWNING, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of its order directing Merner Lumber and Hardware Company to cease and

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Primrose Super Mkt. of Salem, Inc.

    353 F.2d 675 (1st Cir. 1965)   Cited 2 times

    No. 6438. December 7, 1965. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison, Martin R. Ganzglass, Attys., N.L.R.B., on memorandum for petitioner. William F. Joy and Morgan, Brown, Kearns Joy, Boston, Mass., on motion, for respondent Primrose Supermarket of Salem, Inc. Murray Brown, Boston, Mass., of counsel. Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, MARIS and BURGER,fn_ Circuit Judges. Sitting by designation. PER CURIAM. In