Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wyman-Gordon Co.

Holding invalid a legislative rule developed in agency adjudication

Packard Co. v. Labor Board

Holding that Board determinations of unit issues involves a "large measure of informed discretion."

U.S. v. Storer Broadcasting Co.

Finding standing to challenge a Federal Communications Commission rule limiting radio licenses even though the broadcaster had not yet received an unfavorable decision

Pittsburgh Glass Co. v. Board

In Pittsburgh Glass, the Court held that it was not a denial of due process for the Board to refuse to consider evidence relating to the certification issue when petitioner first sought to introduce such evidence at the unfair labor practice hearing.

Labor Board v. I. M. Electric Co.

In N.L.R.B. v. Indiana Michigan Electric Co., 318 U.S. 9, at page 28, 63 S.Ct. 394, at page 405, 87 L.Ed. 579, the Supreme Court stated the general fundamental principles with respect to findings of fact by the Board, saying that the reviewing court is given discretion to see that before a party's rights are foreclosed his case has been fairly heard, and "Findings cannot be said to have been fairly reached unless material evidence which might impeach, as well as that which will support, its findings, is heard and weighed."

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Golden Age Beverage Co.

In NLRB v. Golden Age Beverage Company, 415 F.2d 26, 30 (5th Cir. 1969), this court apparently considered hearsay evidence at this stage of proceedings to set aside an election.

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bata Shoe Co.

In NLRB v. Bata Shoe Co., 377 F.2d 821 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 917, 88 S.Ct. 238, 19 L.Ed.2d 265 (1967), upon which Randall relies, the employer presented specific evidence of more severe procedural irregularities that demonstrably affected the election results.

N.L.R.B. v. Joclin Manufacturing Company

In NLRB v. Joclin Mfg. Co., 314 F.2d 627, 631-32 (2 Cir. 1963), we recognized that the Board's discretion in determining whether or not to hold a hearing was not unfettered, but we held that it could condition the right to a hearing on the existence of substantial and material issues: "[This] requirement [is] not only proper but necessary to prevent dilatory tactics by employers or unions disappointed in the election returns."

N.L.R.B. v. O.K. Van Storage, Inc.

In NLRB v. O.K. Van Storage, Inc., (5 Cir. 1961) 297 F.2d 74, 76, the necessity for granting a hearing on objections to an election was under consideration.

United States Rubber Company v. N.L.R.B

Section 553 - Rule making

Exempting "interpretative rules," among other things, from the notice-and-comment requirement