Ri-Del Tool Mfg. Co, Inc.

31 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

    369 U.S. 404 (1962)   Cited 298 times
    Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"
  2. Labor Board v. Pittsburgh S.S. Co.

    337 U.S. 656 (1949)   Cited 88 times
    Holding "total rejection of an opposed view cannot of itself impugn the integrity or competence of a trier of fact"
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. McGahey

    233 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1956)   Cited 133 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. McGahey, 233 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1956), this court described casual and moderate inquiries, even as to union preference, absent evidence indicating that the employee has reason to consider the inquiries a threat of reprisals, as not constituting an unfair labor practice in violation of § 8(a)(1).
  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whitin Mach. Works

    204 F.2d 883 (1st Cir. 1953)   Cited 57 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Whitin Machine Works, 204 F.2d 883 (1st Cir.1953), for example, an assistant supervisor in his employer's accounting department was, upon a consideration of the nature of his work, determined not to be a supervisor for purposes of litigating his discharge from employment, and, therefore, he was entitled to the protections of the National Labor Relations Act. 204 F.2d at 886.
  5. Guinan v. Famous Players-Lasky Corp.

    167 N.E. 235 (Mass. 1929)   Cited 113 times
    In Guinan v. Famous Players-Lasky Corp. 267 Mass. 501, 516, the court said: "A violation of a statute, ordinance or regulation, although not conclusive, is evidence of negligence on the part of a violator as to all consequences that the statute, ordinance or regulation was intended to prevent."
  6. Betts Baking Co. v. N.L.R.B

    380 F.2d 199 (10th Cir. 1967)   Cited 32 times

    No. 8813. May 26, 1967. William G. Haynes, Topeka, Kan. (O.B. Eidson, Philip H. Lewis, James W. Porter, Charles S. Fisher, Jr., Charles N. Henson, Peter F. Caldwell, R. Austin Northern, Roscoe E. Long and Brock R. Snyder, Topeka, Kan., on brief), for petitioner. Morton Namrow, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost and Warren M. Davison, Washington, D.C., on brief), for respondent. Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, HICKEY, Circuit Judge, and CHRISTENSEN, District Judge

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co.

    351 F.2d 693 (8th Cir. 1965)   Cited 33 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co., 8 Cir., 351 F.2d 693, also decided since this case was submitted, this court stated that if the factual conclusion of the Board is based upon substantial evidence on the whole record, this court must accept such factual determination as binding. Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B., 8 Cir., 354 F.2d 432, decided December 29, 1965, adheres to these principles.
  8. N.L.R.B. v. Joseph Antell, Inc.

    358 F.2d 880 (1st Cir. 1966)   Cited 26 times
    In Antell, the court stated that the smallness of a plant, or a staff, may be material as bearing on the knowledge on the part of the employer of an employee's union activities, but only to the extent that it may be shown to have made it likely that the employer observed, or otherwise learned about the activity in question.
  9. Portable Electric Tools, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    309 F.2d 423 (7th Cir. 1962)   Cited 29 times
    In Portable Electric Tools, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 7 Cir. (1962), 309 F.2d 423, we considered a situation in many respects similar to the case at bar.
  10. N.L.R.B. v. Lexington Chair Company

    361 F.2d 283 (4th Cir. 1966)   Cited 24 times

    No. 10000. Argued November 4, 1965. Decided May 6, 1966. Allen M. Hutter, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Glen M. Bendixsen, Atty., N.L.R.B., on brief), for petitioner. R.D. Douglas, Jr., Greensboro, N.C. (Douglas, Ravenel, Josey Hardy, Greensboro, N.C., on brief), for respondent. Before SOBELOFF and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and MICHIE, District Judge. MICHIE, District Judge. This case comes before

  11. Section 160 - Prevention of unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 160   Cited 7,062 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the procedures for unfair labor practice cases mandated by R.C. 4117.12 and 4117.13 are substantively identical to those established in NLRA to govern unfair labor practice cases before NLRB