International Paper Co.

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,675 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Price Brothers Company v. N.L.R.B
422 F.2d 452 (6th Cir. 1970)
No. 19523. January 30, 1970. Robert F. Young and Maxwell H. Stamper, Dayton, Ohio, for petitioner; Young Alexander, Dayton, Ohio, on brief. John L.A. de Passalacqua, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for appellee; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, William F. Wachter, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, PECK, Circuit Judge, and WEINMAN, District Judge. Honorable Carl A. Weinman
Machaby v. N.L.R.B
377 F.2d 59 (1st Cir. 1967)
No. 6831. Heard April 3, 1967. Decided April 26, 1967. Warren H. Pyle, Boston, Mass., with whom Angoff, Goldman, Manning Pyle, Boston, Mass., was on brief, for petitioner. Peter M. Giesey, Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Gary Green, Washington, D.C., Atty., were on brief for respondents. Allan A. Tepper, Boston, Mass., with whom Snyder, Tepper, Berlin Katz, Boston, Mass., was