Opinion

Anthony v. National Labor Relations Board

  • 132 F.2d 620
  • 11 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 787
  • 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2650
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Filed
Dec 31, 1942
Status
Published
On the bench
Denman, Mathews, Stephens
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 76.2%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner seeks our order permitting him to file and prosecute in forma pauperis a petition for review of an order of the National Labor Relations Board, which petitioner alleges “deprives him of re-employment and back wages due.” The National Labor Relations Act gives this court no jurisdiction of such a controversy. To invoke our jurisdiction under § 10 of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 160 , the petitioner must be a “person aggrieved” by the order. A workman has no personal claim for back pay or reinstatement in employment en-forcible in this court. Hence he is not a “person aggrieved” within the meaning of that Act. National Licorice Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 309 U.S. 350, 363 , 60 S.Ct. 569 , 84 L.Ed. 799 ; National Labor Relations Board v. American Potash & Chemical Corp., 9 Cir., 113 F.2d 232, 235 , 129 A.L.R. 874 ; National Labor Relations Board v. Sunshine Mining Co., 9 Cir., 125 F.2d 757, 761 .

The petition 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.