# Grubb v. National Labor Relations Board

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · March 3, 1971 · 437 F.2d 454

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/294510

## Case

- **Full name:** Marijane Grubb v. National Labor Relations Board, and Columbus Typographical Union No. 5, Affiliated With International Typographical Union, Afl-Cio, Intervenor
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 3, 1971
- **Citations:** 437 F.2d 454; 76 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2686; 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11571
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/294510

## Opinion text

437 F.2d 454
76 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2686 , 65 Lab.Cas. P 11,562
Marijane GRUBB, Petitioner,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, and Columbus
Typographical Union No. 5, Affiliated With
International Typographical Union,
AFL-CIO, Intervenor.
No. 20500.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
March 3, 1971.
Warren H. Morse, Columbus, Ohio, Wright, Harlor, Morris, Arnold & Glander, by Henney & Shaefer and Willis E. Wolfe, Jr., Columbus, Ohio, on the brief, for petitioner.
Nancy M. Sherman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Michael F. Rosenblum, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief, for respondent.
George B. Driesen, Washington, D.C., Gerhard P. Van Arkel, Ronald Rosenberg, Washington, D.C., David Clayman, Columbus, Ohio, on the brief, for intervenor.
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, EDWARDS, Circuit Judge, and O'SULLIVAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
ORDER
1
This case is before the court on a petition to review the order of the National Labor Relations Board dismissing a complaint against the intervenor Union. For a statement of facts and issues reference is made to the decision and order of the Board, reported at 177 NLRB No. 58 . The Board, in disagreement with the Trial Examiner, held that the conduct of the Union with respect to petitioner did not violate 8(b)(1)(A) or (2) of the Act.
2
Upon consideration, the court concludes that the decision of the Board, for the reasons stated in its majority opinion, is correct.
3
It is ordered that the order of the Board be and hereby is affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/294510. Public record. Not legal advice.