§
Ronrico Corp.

24 Cited authorities

  1. Edison Co. v. Labor Board

    305 U.S. 197 (1938)   Cited 19,296 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Board order cannot be grounded in hearsay

  2. Labor Board v. Laughlin

    301 U.S. 1 (1937)   Cited 1,499 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the National Labor Relations Act applied only to interstate commerce, and upholding its constitutionality on that basis

  3. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board

    313 U.S. 177 (1941)   Cited 871 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  4. Atlantic Cleaners Dyers v. U.S.

    286 U.S. 427 (1932)   Cited 487 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presumption of uniformity gives way “[w]here the subject-matter to which the words refer is not the same in the several places where they are used”

  5. Posadas v. National City Bank

    296 U.S. 497 (1936)   Cited 364 times
    Holding that “[w]here there are two acts upon the same subject, effect should be given to both if possible”

  6. Labor Board v. Fainblatt

    306 U.S. 601 (1939)   Cited 281 times
    Upholding NLRA under Commerce Power

  7. Republic Steel Corp. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 7 (1940)   Cited 231 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Republic Steel, supra, the Court refused to enforce an order requiring the employer to pay the full amount of back pay to an employee who had been paid to work for the Work Projects Administration in the meantime.

  8. Puerto Rico v. Shell Co.

    302 U.S. 253 (1937)   Cited 201 times
    Holding that, prior to the adoption of the Puerto Rico Constitution, Puerto Rico was included within the term "territory" in § 3

  9. O'Donoghue v. United States

    289 U.S. 516 (1933)   Cited 221 times
    Holding that judges of District of Columbia are Article III judges whose salaries cannot be decreased

  10. Balzac v. Porto Rico

    258 U.S. 298 (1922)   Cited 228 times
    In Balzac v. Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298, 304-305, it was held that, although the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution with respect to the right of trial by jury applied to the territories of the United States, it did not apply to territory belonging to the United States which had not been incorporated into the Union; and that neither the Philippines nor Porto Rico was territory which had been so incorporated or had become a part of the United States, as distinguished from merely belonging to it.