Sheraton-Houston Corp.

15 Cited authorities

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"
Interstate Circuit v. U.S.
306 U.S. 208 (1939) Cited 512 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding proof of an explicit agreement unnecessary to establish antitrust conspiracy among movie distributors where, "knowing that concerted action was contemplated and invited, the distributors gave their adherence to the scheme and participated in it"
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
Dyer v. MacDougall
201 F.2d 265 (2d Cir. 1952) Cited 321 times
Holding that witness demeanor may persuade a jury to "assume the truth of what he denied," but a court cannot allow a case to go to the jury on such evidence
Howell Chev. Co. v. Labor Board
346 U.S. 482 (1953) Cited 38 times
Holding that a car retailer is subject to Commerce Clause as an "'integral part' of General Motors' national system of distribution."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Remington Rand, Inc.
94 F.2d 862 (2d Cir. 1938) Cited 178 times
In National Labor Relations Board v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 94 F.2d 862, 869, the Board had ordered the employer to deal exclusively with a joint board which had brought the unfair labor practice charges involved in that case.
N.L.R.B. v. Griggs Equipment, Inc.
307 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1962) Cited 52 times
In Griggs, the issue was not even mentioned in the Board's Decision, but is noted in the decision of the court of appeals.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Howell Chevrolet Co.
204 F.2d 79 (9th Cir. 1953) Cited 53 times
In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Howell Chevrolet Co., 204 F.2d 79, 86 (9th Cir. 1953), we recognized that "carriage, behavior, bearing, manner and appearance of a witness, — his demeanor, —" may cause the trier of fact to reject uncontradicted testimony.
Majestic Molded Products, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
330 F.2d 603 (2d Cir. 1964) Cited 26 times
In Majestic Molded Products, Inc., v. N.L.R.B., (2 Cir. 1964) 330 F.2d 603, 606, the layoffs were also in order of seniority.
Bon Hennings Logging Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
308 F.2d 548 (9th Cir. 1962) Cited 17 times
Nos. 17543, 17599. September 4, 1962. George O. Bahrs, and R.J. Scolnik, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner Bon Hennings Logging Co. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, and Elliott Moore, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent and petitioner N.L.R.B. Clayton Knowles, Arcata, Cal., in pro. per, for respondent Clayton Knowles. Before HAMLIN, JERTBERG and BROWNING, Circuit Judges. HAMLIN,
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,092 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Sheraton-Houston Corp.

15 Cited authorities

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"

Holding proof of an explicit agreement unnecessary to establish antitrust conspiracy among movie distributors where, "knowing that concerted action was contemplated and invited, the distributors gave their adherence to the scheme and participated in it"

Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

Holding that witness demeanor may persuade a jury to "assume the truth of what he denied," but a court cannot allow a case to go to the jury on such evidence

Holding that a car retailer is subject to Commerce Clause as an "'integral part' of General Motors' national system of distribution."

In National Labor Relations Board v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 94 F.2d 862, 869, the Board had ordered the employer to deal exclusively with a joint board which had brought the unfair labor practice charges involved in that case.

In Griggs, the issue was not even mentioned in the Board's Decision, but is noted in the decision of the court of appeals.

In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Howell Chevrolet Co., 204 F.2d 79, 86 (9th Cir. 1953), we recognized that "carriage, behavior, bearing, manner and appearance of a witness, — his demeanor, —" may cause the trier of fact to reject uncontradicted testimony.

In Majestic Molded Products, Inc., v. N.L.R.B., (2 Cir. 1964) 330 F.2d 603, 606, the layoffs were also in order of seniority.

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"