§
Hurd Corp.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 506 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Overnite Transportation Company

    308 F.2d 279 (4th Cir. 1962)   Cited 13 times

    No. 8497. Argued March 22, 1962. Decided September 4, 1962. Robert Sewell, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Melvin Pollack, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, on the brief), for petitioner. Ernest W. Machen, Jr., Charlotte, N.C. (J.W. Alexander, Jr., and Blakeney, Alexander Machen, Charlotte, N.C., on the brief), for respondent. Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, and

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Brookside Industries, Inc.

    308 F.2d 224 (4th Cir. 1962)   Cited 11 times
    Upholding Board's conclusion that directing supervisor to obtain information about union organization from her husband, statutory employee, is unfair labor practice

  4. National Labor Rel. Board v. Gluek Brewing Co.

    144 F.2d 847 (8th Cir. 1944)   Cited 26 times
    In Glueck, the court recognized that an independent contractor could not be held liable for an unfair labor practice if it was "an entirely innocent and unconscious instrument" of the perpetrator of the practice, but "[w]here an independent contractor knowingly participates in the effectuation of an unfair practice, it places itself within the orbit of the Board's corrective jurisdiction."

  5. Operating Eng. L. Un. No. 3 v. N.L.R.B

    266 F.2d 905 (D.C. Cir. 1959)   Cited 5 times
    In Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 v. NLRB, the Court of Appeals approved the Board's conclusion that a contractor did not violate the Act by complying with a subcontracting clause under which it was not permitted to subcontract engineering work to a firm that did not observe the terms of the union's contract.

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dant

    207 F.2d 165 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 9 times

    No. 12985. September 15, 1953. George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Asst. Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Norton J. Come, Morris A. Solomon, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Raymond S. Smathurst, Washington, D.C., J.P. Stirling, Roscoe Watts, John T. Casey, Portland, Or., for appellee. Before HEALY, BONE and ORR, Circuit Judges. ORR, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board, hereafter the Board, requests enforcement

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Entwistle Mfg. Co.

    120 F.2d 532 (4th Cir. 1941)   Cited 15 times

    No. 4770. June 10, 1941. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order against the Entwistle Manufacturing Company. Order modified and enforced. Walter B. Wilbur, of Washington, D.C., Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Laurence A. Knapp, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sylvester Garrett, and William Stix, all of Washington, D.C., Attys

  8. N.C. Finishing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    133 F.2d 714 (4th Cir. 1943)   Cited 10 times

    No. 5005. February 17, 1943. On petition to Review and Set Aside and on Request for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the North Carolina Finishing Company to review a cease and desist order issued against it by the National Labor Relations Board which order further directed the reinstatement with back pay of a discharged employee. Order of the board affirmed and judgment to be entered enforcing the order. Before PARKER, SOPER, and DOBIE, Circuit Judges. Walter

  9. National Labor Rel. Board v. Long Lake L. Co.

    138 F.2d 363 (9th Cir. 1943)   Cited 5 times
    In Long Lake Lumber, as in Ace-Alkire, certification proceedings were not involved. Long Lake, the party contesting its joint employer status, actively intervened in the labor dispute between Robinson, its contractor and the union.

  10. Evans v. Patterson

    71 U.S. 224 (1866)

    DECEMBER TERM, 1866. 1. The court reproves the practice of making bills of exception a sort of abstract or index to the history of the case, and so of obscuring its merits. 2. Where a party claiming land as owner, under the laws of Pennsylvania, brings ejectment in the name of the original warrantee, and recovers, against a father; and subsequently producing a deed-poll from the warrantee, made previously to the date of the ejectment and deraigning title to himself, brings another ejectment in his