Smith's Transfer Corp. of Staunton, Virginia

59 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,674 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Jencks v. United States
353 U.S. 657 (1957) Cited 1,103 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that defendants are entitled to obtain the prior statements of persons to government agents when those persons are to testify against the defendants at trial
Palermo v. United States
360 U.S. 343 (1959) Cited 655 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "summaries of an oral statement which evidence substantial selection of material . . . are not to be produced" under the Jencks Act
Labor Board v. Brown
380 U.S. 278 (1965) Cited 473 times 2 Legal Analyses
Approving finding of § 8 violation when "employers' conduct is demonstrably so destructive of employee rights and so devoid of significant service to any legitimate business end that it cannot be tolerated consistently with the Act"
Giboney v. Empire Storage Co.
336 U.S. 490 (1949) Cited 696 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that speech integral to criminal conduct is not protected
American Ship Bldg. v. Labor Board
380 U.S. 300 (1965) Cited 350 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a lockout "for the sole purpose of bringing economic pressure to bear in support of [the employer's] legitimate bargaining position" is lawful
Labor Board v. Seven-Up Co.
344 U.S. 344 (1953) Cited 368 times
Upholding the Board's application of a back pay remedy different from that previously imposed in similar cases, despite no announcement of new remedial rule in rulemaking proceeding
Machinists Local v. Labor Board
362 U.S. 411 (1960) Cited 276 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely
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.”
Electrical Workers v. Labor Board
341 U.S. 694 (1951) Cited 246 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech
Section 3500 - Demands for production of statements and reports of witnesses
18 U.S.C. § 3500 Cited 5,462 times 6 Legal Analyses
Requiring the government to produce "any statement," including testimony provided before the grand jury, only after the witness has testified on direct examination at trial
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"

Smith's Transfer Corp. of Staunton, Virginia

59 Cited authorities

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

Holding that defendants are entitled to obtain the prior statements of persons to government agents when those persons are to testify against the defendants at trial

Holding that "summaries of an oral statement which evidence substantial selection of material . . . are not to be produced" under the Jencks Act

Approving finding of § 8 violation when "employers' conduct is demonstrably so destructive of employee rights and so devoid of significant service to any legitimate business end that it cannot be tolerated consistently with the Act"

Holding that speech integral to criminal conduct is not protected

Holding that a lockout "for the sole purpose of bringing economic pressure to bear in support of [the employer's] legitimate bargaining position" is lawful

Upholding the Board's application of a back pay remedy different from that previously imposed in similar cases, despite no announcement of new remedial rule in rulemaking proceeding

Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

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 the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech

Requiring the government to produce "any statement," including testimony provided before the grand jury, only after the witness has testified on direct examination at trial

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"