Novartis Nutrition Corp.
4 Cited authorities
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 357 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Yesterday's Children, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
115 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 1997) Cited 18 timesTiming of reprimand, coming soon after protected activities, "raise[d] suspicions"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Okun Bros. Shoe Store, Inc.
825 F.2d 102 (6th Cir. 1987) Cited 23 timesIn Meehan v. City of Los Angeles, 825 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1988), the Ninth Circuit held that two incidents involving alleged unconstitutional harassment did not support the existence of a custom sufficient to establish municipal liability under Monell.