§

Hunter Douglas, Inc.

277 N.L.R.B. 1179 (N.L.R.B. 1985)
Hunter Douglas, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  2. 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"

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

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  4. Labor Board v. Cabot Carbon Co.

    360 U.S. 203 (1959)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that "dealing with" as used in 29 U.S.C. § 152 is a "broad term" and is not synonymous to "bargaining with"

  5. Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B

    760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

  6. Automobile Salesmen's Union v. N.L.R.B

    711 F.2d 383 (D.C. Cir. 1983)   Cited 26 times
    Summarizing post-1982 standard for finding violations of the Act in disciplinary actions taken against supervisors

  7. Graham Arch. Products Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    697 F.2d 534 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 25 times
    Arguing for judicial review of second-election orders in the certification context

  8. Lawson Co. v. N.L.R.B

    753 F.2d 471 (6th Cir. 1985)   Cited 6 times

    Nos. 83-5677, 83-5808. Argued November 28, 1984. Decided January 21, 1985. Michael T. McMenamin (argued), William Gorenc, Jr., Walter, Haverfield, Buescher Chockley, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioner. Elliott Moore, Marjorie Gofreed, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before MARTIN, JONES and CONTIE, Circuit Judges. BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., Circuit Judge. The Lawson Company petitions this court to review and set aside an order of the

  9. United States v. Saputski

    496 F.2d 140 (9th Cir. 1974)   Cited 3 times

    No. 73-2558. April 22, 1974. Richard P. Wallace, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, for defendant-appellant. Sidney E. Smith, U.S. Atty., Wilbur T. Nelson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Boise, Idaho, for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. Before MERRILL and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and WOLLENBERG, District Judge. Honorable Albert C. Wollenberg, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation. OPINION MERRILL, Circuit Judge:

  10. Geauga Plastics Co. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Board

    404 F.2d 1382 (6th Cir. 1968)   Cited 2 times

    No. 18076. December 11, 1968. Glenn R. Beustring, Tulsa, Okla., for petitioner, C.A. Kothe, Kothe, Eagleton Hall, Tulsa, Okla., on the brief. Lawrence A. Sherman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Glen M. Bendixsen, Abigail Cooley Baskir, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief. Before PHILLIPS, EDWARDS and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge. The company

  11. Rule 901 - Authenticating or Identifying Evidence

    Fed. R. Evid. 901   Cited 5,325 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]estimony that a matter is what it is claimed to be" is sufficient authentication