# Teamsters Local Union No. 515, Affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · June 22, 1990 · 906 F.2d 719

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7860318

## Case

- **Full name:** TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 515, AFFILIATED WITH the INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** June 22, 1990
- **Citations:** 906 F.2d 719; 285 U.S. App. D.C. 25
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Silberman
- **Judges:** Edwards, Mikva, Silberman
- **Cited by:** 1 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/7860318

## Opinion text

SILBERMAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I am in agreement with my colleagues, but I have the uncomfortable feeling that our mode of analysis — looking at the issue on review as solely a sufficiency of the evidence question — is a good deal closer to Justice Scalia’s dissent in NLRB v. Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc., 110 S.Ct. 1542 , than it is to the majority opinion. But if the Board wished here to suggest it drew an inference from the facts, to which we should defer because it is based on either policy choice or expertise, it was so inarticulate as to defeat my efforts to find it. Compare Georgetown Hotel v. NLRB, 835 F.2d 1467, 1472 (D.C.Cir.1987) (Silberman, J., dissenting).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7860318. Public record. Not legal advice.