Neuhoff Bros., Packers, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.
312 U.S. 426 (1941) Cited 506 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"
Mine Workers v. Arkansas Flooring Co.
351 U.S. 62 (1956) Cited 79 times
In United Mine Workers v. Arkansas Oak Flooring Co., 351 U.S. 62, 76 S.Ct. 559, 100 L. Ed. 941, references to postlegislative history were referred to in the opinion of the Court.
N.L.R.B. v. Air Ctrl. Prod. of St. Petersburg
335 F.2d 245 (5th Cir. 1964) Cited 54 times
No. 21017. July 28, 1964. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Lawrence Gold, Atty., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Stephen B. Goldberg, Paula Omansky, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Harrison C. Thompson, Jr., Shackleford, Farrior, Stallings, Glos Evans, Tampa, Fla., for respondent. Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, BROWN, Circuit Judge, and BREWSTER, District Judge. JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge. This is another § 8(a)(5), 29
N.L.R.B. v. Joclin Manufacturing Company
314 F.2d 627 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 50 times
In NLRB v. Joclin Mfg. Co., 314 F.2d 627, 631-32 (2 Cir. 1963), we recognized that the Board's discretion in determining whether or not to hold a hearing was not unfettered, but we held that it could condition the right to a hearing on the existence of substantial and material issues: "[This] requirement [is] not only proper but necessary to prevent dilatory tactics by employers or unions disappointed in the election returns."
N.L.R.B. v. O.K. Van Storage, Inc.
297 F.2d 74 (5th Cir. 1961) Cited 50 times
In NLRB v. O.K. Van Storage, Inc., (5 Cir. 1961) 297 F.2d 74, 76, the necessity for granting a hearing on objections to an election was under consideration.
Snow v. N.L.R.B
308 F.2d 687 (9th Cir. 1962) Cited 30 times
In Snow, both the employer and the Union chose the clergyman who ran the check and he compared signatures, not just names.
Rockwell Mfg. Co., Kearney Div. v. N.L.R.B
330 F.2d 795 (7th Cir. 1964) Cited 22 times
In Rockwell Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 795, 798 (7 Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 890, 85 S.Ct. 161, 13 L.Ed.2d 94 (1964), the Seventh Circuit specifically held prospective application of a Board rule "was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
Allis-Chalmers Mfg. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
162 F.2d 435 (7th Cir. 1947) Cited 18 times
In Allis-Chalmers the employer downgraded the status of plant inspectors after they had voted to join a union, and it was apparent that the employer acted only because of the inspectors' membership in the union.

Neuhoff Bros., Packers, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

In United Mine Workers v. Arkansas Oak Flooring Co., 351 U.S. 62, 76 S.Ct. 559, 100 L. Ed. 941, references to postlegislative history were referred to in the opinion of the Court.

In NLRB v. O.K. Van Storage, Inc., (5 Cir. 1961) 297 F.2d 74, 76, the necessity for granting a hearing on objections to an election was under consideration.

In Snow, both the employer and the Union chose the clergyman who ran the check and he compared signatures, not just names.

In Rockwell Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 795, 798 (7 Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 890, 85 S.Ct. 161, 13 L.Ed.2d 94 (1964), the Seventh Circuit specifically held prospective application of a Board rule "was neither arbitrary nor capricious.

In Allis-Chalmers the employer downgraded the status of plant inspectors after they had voted to join a union, and it was apparent that the employer acted only because of the inspectors' membership in the union.