§

Venetian Blind Workers' Union

110 N.L.R.B. 780 (N.L.R.B. 1954)
Venetian Blind Workers' Union

9 Cited authorities

  1. Regal Knitwear Co. v. Board

    324 U.S. 9 (1945)   Cited 428 times
    Holding "successors and assigns" are liable for contempt if they are properly within the scope of the injunction under Rule 65(d)

  2. Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.

    309 U.S. 350 (1940)   Cited 316 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA

  3. Southport Pet., Co. v. N.L.R.B

    315 U.S. 100 (1942)   Cited 187 times
    Ruling that dissolution of company and transfer of assets did not prevent enforcement of a Board order

  4. Walling v. Reuter Co.

    321 U.S. 671 (1944)   Cited 101 times
    Holding that the dissolution of a corporate party does not render a case moot

  5. Mobile v. Watson

    116 U.S. 289 (1886)   Cited 76 times
    In Port of Mobile v. Watson, 116 U.S. 289, the supreme court of the United States held that where a municipal corporation is dissolved and a new corporation is created composed of substantially the same community, including substantially the same taxable property, within reduced territorial limits organized for the same general purposes, and holding by transfer without consideration, the public property of the former, it is the successor of the old corporation, and is liable for its debts.

  6. National Labor Rel. Board v. Hopwood Retinning

    104 F.2d 302 (2d Cir. 1939)   Cited 41 times
    In NLRB v. Hopwood Retinning Co., 104 F.2d 302 (2d Cir. 1939), the employer had locked out and discharged employees because of their union activity.

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Birdsall-Stockdale Motor

    208 F.2d 234 (10th Cir. 1953)   Cited 13 times

    No. 4653. November 5, 1953. Margaret L. Fassig, Kansas City, Mo., Atty., N.L.R.B., (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., and Frederick U. Reel, Washington, D.C., and Alan R. Waterstone, Attys., N.L.R.B., Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for petitioner. Frederick A. Potruch (Potruch, Fredricks Lerten and Erwin Lerten, Los Angeles, Cal., on the brief), for respondent. Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge,

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Adel Clay Products Co.

    134 F.2d 342 (8th Cir. 1943)   Cited 13 times

    No. 12481. April 1, 1943. On Petition for the Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Proceedings by the National Labor Relations Board, petitioner, against Adel Clay Products Company, and others, respondents, for enforcement of petitioner's order against respondents. Order enforced. Russell Packard, Atty., National Labor Relations Board of Chicago, Ill., (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Associate Gen. Counsel, Howard Lichtenstein, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Louis

  9. National Labor Bd. v. Venetian Blind Wkrs. U

    207 F.2d 124 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 1 times

    No. 13261. September 18, 1953. George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Arnold Ordman, Mary E. Williamson, Washington, D.C., Robert V. Magor, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner. Todd Todd, Henry C. Todd, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before MATHEWS, STEPHENS and POPE, Circuit Judges. POPE, Circuit Judge. The respondent Union was found to have engaged in unfair labor practices in that, in violation of Section 8(b)(2)