"The Loft" (Showcase, Inc.)

27 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 506 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"
  2. Drivers Union v. Meadowmoor Co.

    312 U.S. 287 (1941)   Cited 382 times
    Holding an injunction banning picketing was "justified only by the violence that induced it and only so long as it counteracts a continuing intimidation"
  3. Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.

    370 U.S. 9 (1962)   Cited 206 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
  4. 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 Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  5. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of ยง 8 "whatever the employer's motive"
  6. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 80 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."
  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Thor Power Tool Co.

    351 F.2d 584 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 68 times
    Concluding that "when the entire record is considered there was substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that [employee's] discharge was the result of his having presented a grievance to the management" even though employee was overheard referring to company's superintendent as "the horse's ass" and was thereafter summarily discharged
  8. TRW-United Greenfield Division v. N.L.R.B

    637 F.2d 410 (5th Cir. 1981)   Cited 38 times
    Discussing what threatened employees could reasonably conclude as the litmus test for a Section 8 violation
  9. Midwest Stock Exchange, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    635 F.2d 1255 (7th Cir. 1980)   Cited 31 times
    In 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."
  10. Graham Arch. Products Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    697 F.2d 534 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 25 times
    Arguing for judicial review of second-election orders in the certification context