13 Cited authorities
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 652 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."
Interstate Circuit v. U.S.
306 U.S. 208 (1939) Cited 512 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding 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"
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 357 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
N.L.R.B. v. Jamaica Towing, Inc.
632 F.2d 208 (2d Cir. 1980) Cited 50 timesHolding that "hallmark" violations of NLRA "include such employer misbehavior as the closing of a plant or threats of plant closure or loss of employment, the grant of benefits to employees, or the reassignment, demotion or discharge of union adherents" and lesser violations "include such employer misconduct as interrogating employees regarding their union sympathies, holding out a `carrot' of promised benefits, expressing anti-union resolve, threatening that unionization will result in decreased benefits, or suggesting that physical force might be used to exclude the union"
Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966) Cited 56 timesUpholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination
Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B
760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 26 times 6 Legal AnalysesAffirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176
Midwest Stock Exchange, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
635 F.2d 1255 (7th Cir. 1980) Cited 31 timesIn Midwest Stock Exch., Inc. v. NLRB, 635 F.2d 1255 (7th Cir. 1980), the court found that an employer discriminatorily enforced its no-solicitation rule by strictly enforcing the rule against union activities but permitting "[s]uch drives as the Crusade of Mercy, collection of blood in a bloodmobile... [on the employer's] premises, the selling of Avon products, Tupperware, boat cruise tickets, raffle tickets, Girl Scout cookies, and a number of other items."
N.L.R.B. v. Challenge-Cook Bros. of Ohio, Inc.
374 F.2d 147 (6th Cir. 1967) Cited 34 timesFinding inference that supervisor who walked past a sign every day saw that sign was reasonable and provided substantial evidence for the NLRB's decision
Lemon Drop Inn, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
752 F.2d 323 (8th Cir. 1985) Cited 6 timesNo. 84-5083. Submitted December 14, 1984. Decided January 9, 1985. J. Dennis O'Brien, Minneapolis, Minn., for petitioner. Elliott Moore, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review of order from the National Labor Relations Board. Before HEANEY, ROSS and FAGG, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The National Labor Relations Board, affirming a decision of the administrative law judge (ALJ), found that the Lemon Drop Inn, Inc., violated the National Labor Relations Act (N.L.R.A
N.L.R.B. v. Georgia Rug Mill
308 F.2d 89 (5th Cir. 1962) Cited 22 timesNo. 19223. September 18, 1962. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Frank A. Constangy, Atlanta, Ga., for respondent. Before BROWN, WISDOM and BELL, Circuit Judges. WISDOM, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of its order that the respondent, Georgia Rug Mill, cease violating Section 8(a)(1) of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §