Kenai Drilling Limited

13 Cited authorities

Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor
521 U.S. 591 (1997) Cited 7,130 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
550 U.S. 618 (2007) Cited 536 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding that statute of limitations barred suit for wage discrimination despite difficulty in discovering such discrimination
East Texas Motor Freight v. Rodriguez
431 U.S. 395 (1977) Cited 1,319 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs who lacked qualifications to be hired as drivers suffered no injury from alleged discriminatory practices and therefore lacked standing to represent class of persons who did suffer injury
Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises
390 U.S. 400 (1968) Cited 1,470 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a barbeque vendor must serve black customers even if he perceives such service as vindicating racial equality, in violation of his religious beliefs
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning
573 U.S. 513 (2014) Cited 274 times 150 Legal Analyses
Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”
Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 556 (1978) Cited 196 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board
324 U.S. 793 (1945) Cited 495 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."
Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.
370 U.S. 9 (1962) Cited 206 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013) Cited 141 times 145 Legal Analyses
Holding that an arbitration agreement that prohibited an employee from pursuing claims collectively did not violate the NLRA and must be enforced
Community Hospitals of Cent Cal. v. N.L.R.B
335 F.3d 1079 (D.C. Cir. 2003) Cited 24 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the single-facility presumption can be rebutted by a showing of “functional integration,” among other factors
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,092 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Kenai Drilling Limited

13 Cited authorities

Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval

Holding that statute of limitations barred suit for wage discrimination despite difficulty in discovering such discrimination

Holding that plaintiffs who lacked qualifications to be hired as drivers suffered no injury from alleged discriminatory practices and therefore lacked standing to represent class of persons who did suffer injury

Holding that a barbeque vendor must serve black customers even if he perceives such service as vindicating racial equality, in violation of his religious beliefs

Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”

Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

Holding that an arbitration agreement that prohibited an employee from pursuing claims collectively did not violate the NLRA and must be enforced

Holding that the single-facility presumption can be rebutted by a showing of “functional integration,” among other factors

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"