§

Hobson Bearing International, Inc.

365 NLRB No. 73 (N.L.R.B. 2017)
Hobson Bearing International, Inc.

17 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning

    573 U.S. 513 (2014)   Cited 280 times   150 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”

  2. New Process Steel v. N.L.R.B.

    560 U.S. 674 (2010)   Cited 142 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board cannot exercise its powers absent a lawfully appointed quorum

  3. National Labor Rel. B. v. Kentucky R. Comm. C

    532 U.S. 706 (2001)   Cited 181 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the burden of proving a statutory exception generally falls on the party who claims a benefit

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Health Care & Retirement Corp. of America

    511 U.S. 571 (1994)   Cited 97 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Board's test is inconsistent with both the statutory language and th[e] Court's precedents"

  5. Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 107 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Town & Country Electric, Inc.

    516 U.S. 85 (1995)   Cited 85 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding "employee," as defined by the NLRA, "does not exclude paid union organizers"

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Relco Locomotives, Inc.

    734 F.3d 764 (8th Cir. 2013)   Cited 95 times
    Holding that a challenge to the composition of the National Labor Relations Board under the Recess Appointments Clause was not jurisdictional and could be forfeited if not raised to the Board

  9. Flex Frac Logistics, L.L.C. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    746 F.3d 205 (5th Cir. 2014)   Cited 31 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a workplace rule preventing employees from discussing wage information violates § 8

  10. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 80 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."