United Supermarkets, Inc.

13 Cited authorities

Mt. Healthy City Board of Ed. v. Doyle
429 U.S. 274 (1977) Cited 9,174 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding if a plaintiff can show a prima facie case of First Amendment retaliation, the district court should go on to determine whether the defendant has shown "by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have reached the same decision ... even in the absence of the protected conduct"
Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp.
429 U.S. 252 (1977) Cited 4,398 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs need show only that "a discriminatory purpose has been a motivating factor in the decision," because, after all, "[r]arely can it be said that a legislature or administrative body operating under a broad mandate made a decision motivated solely by a single concern, or even that a particular purpose was the ‘dominant’ or ‘primary’ one."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.
395 U.S. 575 (1969) Cited 1,035 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"
Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.
369 U.S. 404 (1962) Cited 298 times
Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"
International Union
459 F.2d 1329 (D.C. Cir. 1972) Cited 118 times
Holding that where a “judge plays a role in suppression of the evidence, the force of [any adverse] inference is dissipated”
N.L.R.B. v. S.S. Logan Packing Company
386 F.2d 562 (4th Cir. 1967) Cited 52 times
In NLRB v. Logan Packing Co., 4 Cir., 386 F.2d 562, decided this day, we have considered at some length the serious unreliability of signed authorization cards as an indication of the wishes of a majority of the employees.
Labor Board v. Fruehauf Co.
301 U.S. 49 (1937) Cited 35 times
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 420 and 421. Argued February 11, 1937. Decided April 12, 1937. The National Labor Relations Act, and orders made under it by the National Labor Relations Board, sustained upon the authority of National Labor Relations Board v. Jones Laughlin Steel Corp., ante, p. 1, as applied to a manufacturer of commercial "trailers," (vehicles designed for the transportation of merchandise), having its factory in Michigan, but which obtained
United Dairy Farmers Co-op. Ass'n v. N.L.R.B
633 F.2d 1054 (3d Cir. 1980) Cited 20 times
Nos. 79-1807, 79-1883. Argued May 23, 1980. Decided October 30, 1980. John Regis Valaw, James J. Flaherty (argued), Pittsburgh, Pa., Stephen J. Cabot, Pechner, Dorfman, Wolffe, Rounick Cabot, Philadelphia, Pa., for United Dairy Farmers Cooperative Association. Hugh J. Beins, Jonathan G. Axelrod (argued), Bethesda, Md., Louis B. Kushner, Rothman, Gordon, Foreman, Groudine, P. A., Pittsburgh, Pa., for Teamsters Local Union No. 205. Richard B. Bader (argued), Atty., William A. Lubbers, Gen. Counsel
N.L.R.B. v. C.H. Sprague Son Co.
428 F.2d 938 (1st Cir. 1970) Cited 14 times
No. 7465. June 30, 1970. Eugene B. Granof, Washington, D.C., Attorney, with whom Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and James P. Hendricks, Washington, D.C., Attorney, were on the brief, for petitioner. Bernard B. Gould, Boston, Mass., for respondent. Robert M. Baptiste, Washington, D.C., with whom Hugh J. Beins, Washington, D.C. was on brief, for intervenor Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers Local Union No.
N.L.R.B. v. North Arkansas Elec. Coop., Inc.
446 F.2d 602 (8th Cir. 1971) Cited 9 times
No. 19437. August 12, 1971. Elliott Moore, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Richard S. Robin, William J. Avrutis, Attys., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. Gaines N. Houston, Little Rock, Ark., for respondent. Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, HEANEY and ROSS, Circuit Judges. ROSS, Circuit Judges. The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of its order requireing reinstatement of Jack Lenox

United Supermarkets, Inc.

13 Cited authorities

Holding if a plaintiff can show a prima facie case of First Amendment retaliation, the district court should go on to determine whether the defendant has shown "by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have reached the same decision ... even in the absence of the protected conduct"

Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

Holding that where a “judge plays a role in suppression of the evidence, the force of [any adverse] inference is dissipated”

In NLRB v. Logan Packing Co., 4 Cir., 386 F.2d 562, decided this day, we have considered at some length the serious unreliability of signed authorization cards as an indication of the wishes of a majority of the employees.