Opinion

National Labor Relations Board v. Difco Laboratories, Inc.

  • 391 F.2d 598
  • 67 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2720
  • 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7826
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
Mar 6, 1968
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 71.3%

The opinion

391 F.2d 598

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,

v.

DIFCO LABORATORIES, INC., Respondent.

No. 17618.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

March 6, 1968.

Leon Kestenbaum, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Paul J. Spielberg, Evalyn Gutman, Attorneys, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief for petitioner.

Frederick B. Schwarze, Detroit, Mich., Leonard A. Keller, Detroit, Mich., on brief for respondent.

Before WEICK, Chief Judge, and EDWARDS and PECK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

The three isolated incidents and the general language employed by respondent's agents when considered against the background facts of this case (including those set forth in N.L.R.B. v. Difco Laboratories, Inc., 389 F.2d 663 (6th Cir. 1968) do not in the judgment of this court represent substantial evidence to support the National Labor Relations Board's findings of threats in violation of section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(1) (1964). See Suprenant Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 341 F.2d 756 (6th Cir. 1965).

2

Enforcement of the Board's order is denied.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.