# National Labor Relations Board v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 429

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · January 31, 2008 · 514 F.3d 646

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8411065

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local 429 (07-1279), and its Agent, Nashville Electrical Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee (07-1107), (07-1005/1107/1279)/Cross-Petitioners
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 31, 2008
- **Citations:** 514 F.3d 646; 183 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2641; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2060
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Merritt
- **Judges:** Cole, Griffin, Merritt
- **Cited by:** 5 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/8411065

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- reversing NLRB’s determination that the JATC acted as an agent for the union under “common law agency principles,” because “NLRB did not discuss or apply principles of agency law in its decision”

## Opinion text

MERRITT, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in Judge Griffin’s opinion in Section III and the dispositive final order remanding the case to the NLRB for clarification. I do not find the other sections of the opinion to be necessary to the disposition of the case. But I would like to know from the NLRB whether its ruling is based upon a conclusion that the joint committee is an agent of both the Union and the Electrical Contractor’s Association. I agree with Judge Griffin’s view that the NLRB should clarify its agency ruling and explain the nature of the agency relationship that provides the NLRB with jurisdiction.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8411065. Public record. Not legal advice.