Herman Sausage Co., Inc.

14 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. Telegraphers v. Ry. Express Agency

    321 U.S. 342 (1944)   Cited 672 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the principles of J.I. Case apply to RLA cases
  3. H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 514 (1941)   Cited 241 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.
  4. Birnbaum v. Newport Steel Corp.

    193 F.2d 461 (2d Cir. 1952)   Cited 494 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding that a purchase or sale was required for a Rule 10b–5 cause of action
  5. Labor Board v. Crompton Mills

    337 U.S. 217 (1949)   Cited 102 times
    Holding unlawful unilateral changes significantly different from "any which the employer has proposed" during bargaining
  6. Labor Board v. Pittsburgh S.S. Co.

    337 U.S. 656 (1949)   Cited 88 times
    Holding "total rejection of an opposed view cannot of itself impugn the integrity or competence of a trier of fact"
  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bradley Washfountain

    192 F.2d 144 (7th Cir. 1951)   Cited 55 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Bradley Washfountain Co., 7 Cir., 192 F.2d 144, 152, 153, we explicitly stated: "The cases involving the propriety of an employer's solicitation of individual employees, seem to fall into at least three classes.
  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sharples Chemicals

    209 F.2d 645 (6th Cir. 1954)   Cited 44 times
    In NLRB v. Sharples Chemicals, Inc., 209 F.2d 645 (6th Cir. 1954), the respondent had submitted 53 proposed findings to the NLRB. Of such findings 20 were accepted by the Board and remainder rejected.
  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Stow Manufacturing Co.

    217 F.2d 900 (2d Cir. 1954)   Cited 31 times

    No. 74, Docket 23104. Argued October 6, 1954. Decided December 7, 1954. Fannie M. Boyls, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Jean Engstrom, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, for petitioner. George C. Coughlin, Harrison, Coughlin, Dermody Ingalls, Binghamton, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and L. HAND and FRANK, Circuit Judges. L. HAND,

  10. Armstrong Cork Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    211 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1954)   Cited 27 times
    In Armstrong Cork Co. v. NLRB, 211 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1954), an employer announced to an assembly of workers shortly after a representation election that he intended to remove a "pledge" which the Company had posted on the bulletin board setting forth employees' rights.