Three Sisters Sportswear Co.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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."
  2. Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    804 F.2d 808 (3d Cir. 1986)   Cited 423 times
    Timing and departure from past practice indicates unlawful motive
  3. 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
  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Al Bryant, Inc.

    711 F.2d 543 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 62 times
    Finding that "the frequent interchange of craftsman" between the two companies is "substantial evidence to support" centralized labor relations control
  5. N.L.R.B. v. S.E. Nichols, Inc.

    862 F.2d 952 (2d Cir. 1988)   Cited 30 times
    Finding that violations at various locations managed by the same district supervisor justified an order covering all locations managed by that district supervisor
  6. N.L.R.B. v. Intern. Measurement Control Co.

    978 F.2d 334 (7th Cir. 1992)   Cited 25 times
    Finding conveyance fraudulent under section 6(b) of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act where that the defendant paid off debts to insiders when the defendant was insolvent and the insiders knew the defendant was insolvent
  7. Fugazy Continental Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    725 F.2d 1416 (D.C. Cir. 1984)   Cited 23 times
    Affirming alter ego finding where only portion of company's operations were shut and transferred to a new, "sham" company established to perform the same work
  8. Teamsters Local 115 v. N.L.R.B

    640 F.2d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1981)   Cited 25 times
    Concluding that "the negative aspects of the order overwhelm the marginal benefit"
  9. N.L.R.B. v. Union Nacional de Trabajadores

    540 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1976)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 75-1372, 75-1374 to 75-1376. Argued February 10, 1976. Decided June 21, 1976. Robert A. Giannasi, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., with whom John S. Irving, Jr., Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel and Andrew F. Tranovich, Washington, D.C., were on brief for petitioner. Paul Schachter, Hato Rey, P.R., with whom David Scribner, Elizabeth Schneider, New York City, Luis M. Escribano, Hato Rey, P.R., Ralph Shapiro, New York City, and Ismael Delgado Gonzalez, San Juan

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Long Island Airport Limousine Serv

    468 F.2d 292 (2d Cir. 1972)   Cited 26 times
    Affirming NLRB finding of Section 8 violation where discharged employee, who was “union ‘spearhead’ for organizing the [c]ompany's drivers,” had been soliciting union support on day before abrupt discharge, and employer's asserted reasons that employee had poor employment record, had received traffic tickets, and submitted incomplete paperwork—including “a particularly serious incident ... that involved missing cash collections” for which he was warned—were contradictory and pretextual, and where treatment of other employees for similar misconduct was disparate