3 Cited authorities
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,707 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding 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 "
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Universal Camera
179 F.2d 749 (2d Cir. 1950) Cited 24 timesNo. 54, Docket 21395. Argued December 6, 1949. Decided January 10, 1950. A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ruth Weyand, Asst. Gen. Counsel, William J. Avrutis, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Kaye, Scholer, Fierman Hays, New York City, Frederick R. Livingston, New York City, for respondent. On petition of the National Labor Relations Board for an order, "enforcing" an order of the Board to "cease
N.L.R.B. v. Cousins Associates, Inc.
283 F.2d 242 (2d Cir. 1960) Cited 7 timesNo. 21, Docket 26109. Argued September 26, 1960. Decided October 3, 1960. Allison W. Brown, Jr., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel and Donald J. Bardell, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Charles R. Katz, New York City (Katz Wolchok, New York City, on the brief), for respondent. Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE and FRIENDLY, Circuit Judges