§

Wagner Lincoln Mercury, Inc.

149 N.L.R.B. 1067 (N.L.R.B. 1964)
Wagner Lincoln Mercury, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cambria Clay Prod

    215 F.2d 48 (6th Cir. 1954)   Cited 35 times

    No. 12072. July 7, 1954. Frederick U. Reel, Washington, D.C. (George J. Bott, David P. Findling, A. Norman Somers, Frederick U. Reel, Thomas R. Haley, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. J. Mack Swigert, Cincinnati, Ohio (J. Mack Swigert, Charles D. Lindberg, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief; Miller, Searl Fitch, Portsmouth, Ohio, of counsel), for respondent. Before McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit Judges, and GOURLEY, District Judge. McALLISTER, Circuit Judge. The National Labor

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Jamestown Sterling

    211 F.2d 725 (2d Cir. 1954)   Cited 29 times

    No. 170, Docket 22862. Argued March 9, 1954. Decided April 5, 1954. George J. Bott, David P. Findling, A. Norman Somers, Owsley Vose and Jean Engstrom, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Rogerson Hewes, J. Russell Rogerson, Jamestown, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, MEDINA and HARLAN, Circuit Judges. MEDINA, Circuit Judge. This case involves a more or less typical controversy between employer and employees. In the week of July 7, 1952, following the shutdown of the plant in the Village of Falconer

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wallick

    198 F.2d 477 (3d Cir. 1952)   Cited 27 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Wallick, 198 F.2d 477 (3 Cir. 1952), that court sustained a Board order requiring a respondent partnership which operated several enterprises engaged in the manufacture of ladies' garments to either reopen a plant which it had closed in violation of the Act because its employees had organized or give its employees an opportunity to work in other plants operated by the partnership.

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Adkins Transfer Co.

    226 F.2d 324 (6th Cir. 1955)   Cited 22 times

    No. 12371. October 5, 1955. Owsley Vose, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Elizabeth W. Weston, Alice Andrews, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Judson Harwood, Nashville, Tenn., for respondent. Before McALLISTER, MILLER, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. McALLISTER, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board filed a petition for enforcement of its order issued against respondent, Adkins Transfer Company, finding it guilty of violation of Section 8(a) (3)

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Lassing

    284 F.2d 781 (6th Cir. 1960)   Cited 16 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Lassing, 284 F.2d 781 (C.A.6, 1960), this Court held that an employer may curtail operations, with a resulting loss of employment on certain employees, as long as the changes in operations are not illegally motivated.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Mahon Company

    269 F.2d 44 (6th Cir. 1959)   Cited 16 times
    In R. C. Mahon the company was in bad financial condition; it had made efforts for two years to curtail expenses, and its two major executives had been critically ill during this period.

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Kingsford

    313 F.2d 826 (6th Cir. 1963)   Cited 9 times

    No. 14977. February 28, 1963. William J. Avrutis, National Labor Relations Bd., Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Bd., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. O.S. Hoebreckx, Robertson, Hoebreckx Davis, Milwaukee, Wis., for respondent. Before CECIL, Chief Judge, MILLER, Circuit Judge, and BOYD, District Judge. BOYD, District Judge. The National Labor Relations Board

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Savoy Laundry, Inc.

    327 F.2d 370 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 8 times
    In Savoy Laundry the employer operated one laundry plant where he processed both retail laundry pickups and wholesale laundering.

  9. National Labor R.B. v. Ellis Watts Products

    297 F.2d 576 (6th Cir. 1962)   Cited 6 times

    No. 14565. January 15, 1962. Rosanna Blake, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Samuel M. Singer, Herman I. Branse, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Donald E. Calhoun, Cincinnati, Ohio, for respondent. Before MARTIN, WEICK and O'SULLIVAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The case is before us on petition for enforcement of the Board's order. The Board found that respondent employer had interfered with, restrained and coerced employees