Redway Carriers

19 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bildisco & Bildisco
465 U.S. 513 (1984) Cited 1,161 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that the failure of Congress to draft an exclusion for certain collective bargaining agreements in 11 U.S.C. § 365 indicates that the provision applies to all such agreements, in light of the previous use of such an exclusion by Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 1167
Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
482 U.S. 27 (1987) Cited 369 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors
Golden State Bottling Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
414 U.S. 168 (1973) Cited 497 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that Rule 65(d) allows enforcement of orders against successors of enjoined parties
Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.
406 U.S. 272 (1972) Cited 478 times 49 Legal Analyses
Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
Labor Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.
373 U.S. 221 (1963) Cited 358 times 1 Legal Analyses
Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fleetwood Trailer Co.
389 U.S. 375 (1967) Cited 233 times
In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.
U.S. v. International Building Co.
345 U.S. 502 (1953) Cited 257 times
Holding that Tax Court decisions based on stipulations are res judicata for the years they govern
Labor Board v. Burnup Sims
379 U.S. 21 (1964) Cited 106 times 21 Legal Analyses
Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"
Southport Pet., Co. v. N.L.R.B
315 U.S. 100 (1942) Cited 187 times
Ruling that dissolution of company and transfer of assets did not prevent enforcement of a Board order
Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations
Fed. R. Evid. 408 Cited 4,401 times 49 Legal Analyses
Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)

Redway Carriers

19 Cited authorities

Holding that the failure of Congress to draft an exclusion for certain collective bargaining agreements in 11 U.S.C. § 365 indicates that the provision applies to all such agreements, in light of the previous use of such an exclusion by Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 1167

Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors

Holding that Rule 65(d) allows enforcement of orders against successors of enjoined parties

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement

Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"

In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.

Holding that Tax Court decisions based on stipulations are res judicata for the years they govern

Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

Ruling that dissolution of company and transfer of assets did not prevent enforcement of a Board order

Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)