§
W. T. Grant Co.

3 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

  2. Winchester Spinning Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    402 F.2d 299 (4th Cir. 1968)   Cited 15 times

    No. 11946. Argued May 7, 1968. Decided October 8, 1968. Frank A. Constangy, Atlanta, Ga. (Constangy Prowell, Atlanta, Ga., and Parker, McGuire Baley, Asheville, N.C., on brief), for petitioner. Herbert Fishgold, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., on brief), for respondent. Before BRYAN, CRAVEN and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges. CRAVEN, Circuit Judge. Winchester Spinning

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Entwistle Mfg. Co.

    120 F.2d 532 (4th Cir. 1941)   Cited 15 times

    No. 4770. June 10, 1941. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order against the Entwistle Manufacturing Company. Order modified and enforced. Walter B. Wilbur, of Washington, D.C., Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Laurence A. Knapp, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sylvester Garrett, and William Stix, all of Washington, D.C., Attys