485 U.S. 568 (1988) Cited 732 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union’s distribution of handbills at the entrances of a shopping mall was not threatening, coercing, or restraining within meaning of section 8(b) because there had been "no violence, picketing, or patrolling," and "no suggestion that the leaflets had any coercive effect on customers of the mall"
502 U.S. 527 (1992) Cited 156 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that Board erred in finding that employer should have allowed union on its premises because it had no other way to reach its target audience, inasmuch as in reaching its decision the Board misconstrued prior Supreme Court precedent
Finding petitioner's pro se status did not excuse his failure to appear and case was properly dismissed based on petitioner's failure to appear at trial
Ruling that because a non-exclusive easement holder does not hold a possessory interest in the underlying fee, the easement holder cannot enjoin a trespasser from using the property absent a showing that the trespasser's use interferes with the easement holder's use
Holding that the alleged discriminatory conduct in allowing solicitation by one group while barring such solicitation by another requires that the discrimination be among comparable groups or activities
Recognizing that "there is a substantial difference between the rights of employees and of nonemployees with respect to the distribution of union literature on privately owned property"
Finding that employer may deny access to nonemployees seeking to trespass on the employer's property for purpose of distributing handbills to customers regarding "boycott" activity