§

Hogan Transports, Inc.

363 NLRB No. 196 (N.L.R.B. 2016)
Hogan Transports, Inc.

36 Cited authorities

  1. Upjohn Co. v. United States

    449 U.S. 383 (1981)   Cited 4,301 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding that communications between corporate counsel and a corporation's employees made for the purpose of rendering legal advice are protected by the attorney-client privilege

  2. Fisher v. United States

    425 U.S. 391 (1976)   Cited 2,089 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that act of producing evidence may, in some circumstances, trigger Fifth Amendment safeguards

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  4. First National Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    452 U.S. 666 (1981)   Cited 269 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  6. Holly Farms Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    517 U.S. 392 (1996)   Cited 136 times
    Holding that where statute's meaning is obvious, courts and Board must defer to Congress's unambiguous intent, but where ambiguity exists, courts must defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of the statute

  7. U.S. v. Constr. Prods. Research, Inc.

    73 F.3d 464 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 408 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that order directing witness to testify before administrative agency could be appealed immediately without defiance and contempt

  8. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

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

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 105 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

  10. U.S. v. Int'l Bhd.

    119 F.3d 210 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 229 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an individual could not assert individual privilege even though the law firm failed to clarify that it represented only his employer, in violation of state rules of professional responsibility