Opinion

Red Arrow Freight Lines v. National Labor Relations Board

  • 423 F.2d 35
  • 73 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2622
  • 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10630
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Feb 19, 1970
Status
Published
On the bench
Wisdom, Coleman, Simpson
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 58.2%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have concluded on the merits that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. Accordingly, we have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties of this fact in writing.

See

Huth v. Southern Pacific Co., 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526 ; Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804 ; 5th Cir. R. 18.

The National Labor Relations Board found that Red Arrow Freight Lines violated section 8(a) (3) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158 (a) (3) and (1), by discriminatorily refusing to hire Lyal L.

*36

Foster because of his actual or suspected membership in the Teamsters Union. 175 NLRB No. 160 . The only question on review is whether substantial evidence on the record taken as a whole supports this conclusion.

See

NLRB v. Monroe Auto Equipment Co., 5 Cir. 1968, 392 F.2d 559 .

On many of the factual questions, reasonable men might have reached different conclusions, and there were several credibility determinations to be made by the Trial Examiner. But there is ample evidence to support the findings.

Therefore, we enforce the order of the Board.

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.