13 Cited authorities
Jencks v. United States
353 U.S. 657 (1957) Cited 1,106 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding 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 AnalysesHolding that "summaries of an oral statement which evidence substantial selection of material . . . are not to be produced" under the Jencks Act
Radio Union v. Broadcast Serv
380 U.S. 255 (1965) Cited 327 timesHolding that two entities were a single employer and therefore that their gross receipts could be totaled together to establish jurisdiction under the National Labor Relations Act
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal AnalysesApproving "discovery-type standard"
N.L.R.B. v. Zelrich Company
344 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1965) Cited 50 timesNo. 21482. May 11, 1965. Rehearing Denied June 22, 1965. Thomas Canafax, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Anthony J. Obadal, Attys., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. Warren Whitham, Dallas, Tex., for respondent. Before BROWN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge. HUNTER, District Judge. The National Labor Relations Board,
Sakrete of Northern Calif., Inc. v. N.L.R.B
332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964) Cited 48 timesNo. 18745. May 21, 1964. Rehearing Denied July 9, 1964. Graydon, Head Ritchey, William A. McKenzie, Leslie A. Meek, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner. Arnold Orman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison and Peter M. Giesey, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Leon Ardzrooni, Neyhart Grodin, San Francisco, Cal., on behalf of amicus curiae-Freight, Construction, General Drivers Helpers, Local 287. Before MADDEN
McGraw-Edison Company v. N.L.R.B
419 F.2d 67 (8th Cir. 1969) Cited 33 timesNo. 19429. December 4, 1969. Paul S. Kuelthau, of Moller, Talent Kuelthau, St. Louis, for petitioner and filed brief and reply brief. John D. Burgoyne, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, N.L.R.B., and Robertamarie Kiley, Atty., N.L.R.B., were on the brief with Mr. Burgoyne. Charles A. Werner, St. Louis, Mo., for intervenor; Gibson Langsdale, Kansas
Daniel Construction Company v. N.L.R.B
341 F.2d 805 (4th Cir. 1965) Cited 36 timesIn Daniel Construction Co. v. N.L.R.B., 341 F.2d 805, cert. denied, 382 U.S. 831, 86 S.Ct. 70, 15 L.Ed.2d 75 (1965), this court considered the identical question presented here. The Board, having found that the company had violated section 8(a) (1) during the course of an election campaign and that such conduct had interfered with the employees' free choice, set the election aside, and ordered that a new election be held. The company sought review of both matters in this court.
Fafnir Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
362 F.2d 716 (2d Cir. 1966) Cited 24 timesRelying upon the “clear and unmistakable waiver” rule
Waycross Sportswear, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
403 F.2d 832 (5th Cir. 1968) Cited 6 timesIn Waycross Sportswear, Inc. v. NLRB, 403 F.2d 832 (5 Cir. 1968), the court held that an employer's refusal to permit experts selected by a union to make time and motion studies within the plant constituted a § 8(a)(5) violation.
Section 3500 - Demands for production of statements and reports of witnesses
18 U.S.C. § 3500 Cited 5,500 times 6 Legal AnalysesRequiring the government to produce "any statement," including testimony provided before the grand jury, only after the witness has testified on direct examination at trial