Lumbee Farms Cooperative, Inc.

15 Cited authorities

Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board
350 U.S. 270 (1956) Cited 403 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"
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
Labor Board v. Burnup Sims
379 U.S. 21 (1964) Cited 106 times 21 Legal Analyses
Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"
Southern S.S. Co. v. Labor Board
316 U.S. 31 (1942) Cited 160 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding an abuse of discretion where the National Labor Relations Board sought to fulfill one congressional objective but “wholly ignore[d] other and equally important Congressional objectives”
Linden Lumber Division, Summer & Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
419 U.S. 301 (1974) Cited 55 times 12 Legal Analyses
Recognizing "that while the election process has acknowledged superiority in ascertaining whether a union has majority support, [signed employee authorization] cards may adequately reflect employee sentiment"
Marlene Industries Corp. v. N.L.R.B
712 F.2d 1011 (6th Cir. 1983) Cited 36 times
In Marlene Industries Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 712 F.2d 1011 (6th Cir. 1983), this Court stated: "[w]e are mindful of the admonishment that 'neither collateral estoppel nor res judicata is rigidly applied.
Teamsters Local 115 v. N.L.R.B
640 F.2d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1981) Cited 25 times
Concluding that "the negative aspects of the order overwhelm the marginal benefit"
Rogers Manufacturing Company v. N.L.R.B
486 F.2d 644 (6th Cir. 1973) Cited 20 times
Leaving until compliance proceedings the question of which lone striker out of fourteen would not be entitled to reinstatement when the NLRB only had the authority to reinstate thirteen strikers
N.L.R.B. v. Solo Cup Company
237 F.2d 521 (8th Cir. 1956) Cited 40 times
No. 15524. October 18, 1956. Rehearing Denied November 16, 1956. Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief), for petitioner. John J. Hasburgh, Kansas City, Mo. (Carl E. Enggas and Watson S. Marshall Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., were with him on the brief), for respondent. Before WOODROUGH
N.L.R.B. v. A. Lasaponara Sons, Inc.
541 F.2d 992 (2d Cir. 1976) Cited 15 times
Stating that a work stoppage was a protected strike because, unlike extreme cases of economic coercion like Marshall Car Wheel , "the economic pressure ... clearly failed to reach a degree so grossly disproportionate to the goal sought to be achieved that it renders the conduct unprotected"
Section 6621 - Determination of rate of interest
26 U.S.C. § 6621 Cited 1,873 times 23 Legal Analyses
Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions

Lumbee Farms Cooperative, Inc.

15 Cited authorities

Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

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

Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

Finding an abuse of discretion where the National Labor Relations Board sought to fulfill one congressional objective but “wholly ignore[d] other and equally important Congressional objectives”

Recognizing "that while the election process has acknowledged superiority in ascertaining whether a union has majority support, [signed employee authorization] cards may adequately reflect employee sentiment"

In Marlene Industries Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 712 F.2d 1011 (6th Cir. 1983), this Court stated: "[w]e are mindful of the admonishment that 'neither collateral estoppel nor res judicata is rigidly applied.

Concluding that "the negative aspects of the order overwhelm the marginal benefit"

Leaving until compliance proceedings the question of which lone striker out of fourteen would not be entitled to reinstatement when the NLRB only had the authority to reinstate thirteen strikers

Stating that a work stoppage was a protected strike because, unlike extreme cases of economic coercion like Marshall Car Wheel , "the economic pressure ... clearly failed to reach a degree so grossly disproportionate to the goal sought to be achieved that it renders the conduct unprotected"

Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions