§

Yuker Construction Co.

335 N.L.R.B. 1072 (N.L.R.B. 2001)
Yuker Construction Co.

22 Cited authorities

  1. University of Pennsylvania v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

    493 U.S. 182 (1990)   Cited 643 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff university failed to make out a cognizable First Amendment claim in light of speculative, attenuated, and remote harm

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  3. 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"

  4. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board

    324 U.S. 793 (1945)   Cited 495 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

  5. Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 105 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  7. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

  8. Equal Emp. Opp. Comm. v. Luth. Soc. Ser

    186 F.3d 959 (D.C. Cir. 1999)   Cited 80 times
    Holding that exceptional circumstances were needed to overcome strong presumption of waiver based on failure to exhaust

  9. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 80 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."

  10. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Illinois Department of Employment Security

    995 F.2d 106 (7th Cir. 1993)   Cited 28 times
    Reversing district court's refusal to enforce EEOC subpoena based upon state statute

  11. Rule 501 - Privilege in General

    Fed. R. Evid. 501   Cited 4,230 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "in a civil case, state law governs privilege regarding a claim or defense for which state law supplies the rule of decision"

  12. Section 421.11 - Unemployment agency; cooperation with federal agency; reports; compliance with federal regulations; "social security act" defined; disclosure of information; reciprocal agreements

    Mich. Comp. Laws § 421.11   Cited 35 times

    (a) In the administration of this act, the unemployment agency shall cooperate with the appropriate agency of the United States under the social security act. The unemployment agency shall make reports, in a form and containing information as the appropriate agency of the United States may require, and shall comply with the provisions that the appropriate agency of the United States prescribes to assure the correctness and verification of the reports. The unemployment agency, subject to this act