§

Painters, Local Union No. 823

161 N.L.R.B. 620 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Painters, Local Union No. 823

5 Cited authorities

  1. Teamsters Local v. Lucas Flour Co.

    369 U.S. 95 (1962)   Cited 1,181 times
    Holding that "under the mandate of Lincoln Mills " federal labor law is "paramount" when deciding issues raised under § 301

  2. Smith v. Evening News Assn

    371 U.S. 195 (1962)   Cited 815 times
    Holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union

  3. Truck Dvrs. Un. L. No. 413, Etc. v. N.L.R.B

    334 F.2d 539 (D.C. Cir. 1964)   Cited 56 times

    Nos. 17662, 17663. Argued October 30, 1963. Decided April 9, 1964. Certiorari Denied November 16, 1964. See 85 S.Ct. 264. Mr. David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., with whom Messrs. Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D.C., and L.N.D. Wells, Jr., Dallas, Tex., were on the brief, for petitioners in No. 17,662. Mr. L.N.D. Wells, Jr., Dallas, Tex., with whom Messrs. David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., and Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for petitioners in No. 17,663. Mr. Gary Green, Atty

  4. N.L.R.B. v. AMALGAMATED LITHOGRAPHERS OF AM

    309 F.2d 31 (9th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times
    In NLRB v. Amalgamated Lithographers of America, 309 F.2d 31, 51 LRRM 2093 (9th Cir. 1962), cert. denied 372 U.S. 943, 82 S.Ct. 936, 9 L.Ed.2d 968 (1963), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a union committed an unfair labor practice in refusing to bargain in good faith when the union insisted upon the inclusion of an illegal contract provision.

  5. Building Constr. Trades Coun. v. N.L.R.B

    328 F.2d 540 (D.C. Cir. 1964)   Cited 17 times
    In Building ConstructionTrades Council, supra, the same panel as in Orange Belt I made explicit that union signatory clauses — those requiring general contractors to use subcontractors who are "signatory to the agreements of the various construction local unions" — by their terms have a secondary focus, and that attempts to secure their enforcement by strikes come within the proscription of section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B). That is precisely the situation we have here.