§

Seedorf Masonry, Inc.

360 N.L.R.B. 869 (N.L.R.B. 2014)
Seedorf Masonry, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

  1. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  2. Taylor Warehouse v. National Labor Relations

    98 F.3d 892 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 26 times
    Holding that "credibility determinations made by . . . administrative law judge and adopted by the [National Labor Relations Board] (NLRB) are entitled to great weight"

  3. Haas Electric, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    299 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2002)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that employer's letter expressed an unequivocal intent to terminate collective bargaining relationship even though it “admittedly did not use precise language in articulating its intent to withdraw”

  4. Cedar Valley Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    977 F.2d 1211 (8th Cir. 1992)   Cited 16 times
    In Cedar Valley, we enforced the Board's order that an employer was bound by a subsequent § 8(f) pre-hire agreement in virtually identical circumstances.

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Rome Elec. Systems

    286 F. App'x 697 (11th Cir. 2008)

    No. 07-13132. July 18, 2008. Julie B. Broido, Gregory Lauro, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Mark M.J. Webb, Brinson, Askew, Berry, Seigler, Richardson Davis, LLP, Rome, GA, for Respondent. Petition for Review of a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board. NLRB No. 10-CA-35458. Before TJOFLAT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and VINSON, District Judge. Honorable C. Roger Vinson, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Florida, sitting by designation. PER CURIAM: This case

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second

  7. 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