Miranda Fuel Co., Inc.

24 Cited authorities

Conley v. Gibson
355 U.S. 41 (1957) Cited 59,260 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"
Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman
345 U.S. 330 (1953) Cited 881 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union acting in its representative capacity owes a duty of fair representation to those on whose behalf it acts
Steele v. L. N.R. Co.
323 U.S. 192 (1944) Cited 959 times
Holding that a labor organization must represent all members of a "craft or class of employees . . . regardless of their union affiliations or want of them"
Radio Officers v. Labor Board
347 U.S. 17 (1954) Cited 470 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"
Labor Board v. Insurance Agents
361 U.S. 477 (1960) Cited 324 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that, subject to the duty to bargain in good faith, "parties should have wide latitude in their negotiations"
United States v. Dow
357 U.S. 17 (1958) Cited 259 times
Holding that only the owner on the date of the taking is entitled to receive just compensation.
Garment Workers v. Labor Board
366 U.S. 731 (1961) Cited 213 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support
Tunstall v. Brotherhood
323 U.S. 210 (1944) Cited 286 times
In Tunstall v. Brotherhood, 323 U.S. 210, the federal right was derived from the federal duty of the union to act as bargaining representative for all members of the union.
Teamsters Local v. Labor Board
365 U.S. 667 (1961) Cited 174 times
Holding that the Board may not dictate specific procedures and rules that a union must adopt, not that the Board errs when it determines that a union engaged in unfair labor practices by failing to operate in accordance with objective criteria
Railroad Trainmen v. Howard
343 U.S. 768 (1952) Cited 215 times
Holding that an all-white union violated its duty of fair representation by pressuring the railroad to fire African-American employees in the represented craft and to hire white workers to replace them

Miranda Fuel Co., Inc.

24 Cited authorities

Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

Holding that a union acting in its representative capacity owes a duty of fair representation to those on whose behalf it acts

Holding that a labor organization must represent all members of a "craft or class of employees . . . regardless of their union affiliations or want of them"

Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"

Holding that, subject to the duty to bargain in good faith, "parties should have wide latitude in their negotiations"

Holding that only the owner on the date of the taking is entitled to receive just compensation.

Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

In Tunstall v. Brotherhood, 323 U.S. 210, the federal right was derived from the federal duty of the union to act as bargaining representative for all members of the union.

Holding that the Board may not dictate specific procedures and rules that a union must adopt, not that the Board errs when it determines that a union engaged in unfair labor practices by failing to operate in accordance with objective criteria

Holding that an all-white union violated its duty of fair representation by pressuring the railroad to fire African-American employees in the represented craft and to hire white workers to replace them