Professional Medical Transport, Inc.

34 Cited authorities

  1. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 115,378 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
  2. St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

    509 U.S. 502 (1993)   Cited 12,388 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination
  3. Litton Financial Printing Division v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    501 U.S. 190 (1991)   Cited 795 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a court must determine the validity of an arbitration agreement, it "cannot avoid that duty" just because the court must decide an issue on the merits
  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning

    573 U.S. 513 (2014)   Cited 274 times   150 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”
  5. Holly Farms Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    517 U.S. 392 (1996)   Cited 136 times
    Holding that where statute's meaning is obvious, courts and Board must defer to Congress's unambiguous intent, but where ambiguity exists, courts must defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of the statute
  6. In re Japanese Electronic Products

    723 F.2d 238 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 596 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that meeting minutes were prima facie authenticated because they had "the appearance, content and substance typical of minutes" and "[t]hey were produced by the defendants"
  7. Zimomra v. Alamo Rent-A-Car

    522 U.S. 948 (1997)   Cited 104 times
    Holding that active supervision unnecessary where challenged ordinance left defendants, car rental companies at Denver International Airport, virtually no discretionary authority in setting and collecting usage fees from their customers because usage fee determined by detailed formula
  8. Billet v. Cigna Corp.

    940 F.2d 812 (3d Cir. 1991)   Cited 291 times
    Holding that employee's "view of his performance is not at issue; what matters is the perception of the decision maker"
  9. 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 Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  10. Grizzell v. City of Columbus Div. of Police

    461 F.3d 711 (6th Cir. 2006)   Cited 169 times
    Holding that testimony regarding a deputy chief's statement regarding the instructions of the police chief was not inadmissible hearsay
  11. Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 803   Cited 12,979 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities