§

Horizon Group of New England

347 N.L.R.B. 795 (N.L.R.B. 2006)
Horizon Group of New England

15 Cited authorities

  1. Myers v. Bennett Law Offices

    238 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 363 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the “locus of the injury” is “a relevant factor” when analyzing venue under § 1391(b)

  2. Sw. Adm'rs, Inc. v. Rozay's Transfer

    791 F.2d 769 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 326 times
    Holding that fraud in the execution is a valid defense, but that fraud in the inducement is not

  3. Hetchkop v. Woodlawn at Grassmere

    116 F.3d 28 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 128 times
    Holding persons have a "basic responsibility . . . to review a document before signing it"

  4. Laborers' Pension Fund v. a C Environmental

    301 F.3d 768 (7th Cir. 2002)   Cited 104 times
    Finding as a matter of law, that there was no fraud in the execution where employer failed to show reasonable reliance on the union's representations; explaining that employer's ignorance of the nature of the contract was not excusable where he did not take the opportunity to review the document

  5. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  6. Connors v. Fawn Mining Corp.

    30 F.3d 483 (3d Cir. 1994)   Cited 96 times
    Holding that including a pension-contribution provision in a union contract where the defrauded party was told that no such term would be included constituted fraud in the execution

  7. Operating Eng. Pension Trust v. Gilliam

    737 F.2d 1501 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 114 times
    Holding that an employer had a valid contract defense where a union representative told him that he was signing an agreement to operate a bulldozer for a single union project, but the written agreement actually contained a collective bargaining agreement covering all of the employer's employees

  8. Mesa Verde Const. v. N. Cal. D. Cou. of Lab

    861 F.2d 1124 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 65 times
    Holding that circuit court should defer to Supreme Court's interpretation of the Act

  9. Local 58 Pension Trust Fund v. Gary's Elec

    227 F.3d 646 (6th Cir. 2000)   Cited 29 times
    Holding the defendant company failed to establish fraud in the execution where its argument "basically comes down to [the company owner's] claim that he was ignorant of the type of arrangement to which he was agreeing when he signed" the collective bargaining agreement at issue, but "failed to demonstrate that [he] carried out his basic responsibility to review" the agreement

  10. Overnite Transportation Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    140 F.3d 259 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that agency is provable only by principal's conduct, and not by subjective beliefs of those dealing with alleged agent

  11. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,219 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”