# Amalgamated Clothing Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · June 27, 1966 · 365 F.2d 898

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9339308

## Case

- **Full name:** AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. SAGAMORE SHIRT COMPANY, d/b/a Spruce Pine Manufacturing Co.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** June 27, 1966
- **Citations:** 365 F.2d 898
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Fahy
- **Judges:** Bazelon, Fahy, Leventhal
- **Cited by:** 2 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/9339308

## Opinion text

FAHY, Circuit Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part):
I concur in the opinion of the court except in the following respects:
1. (a) In Part I, while I agree the Company may “relitigate” the supervisory status of its floorladies, for the reason stated by the court, I think such “relitigation” should be limited to consideration, by the trial examiner and Board, of the floorladies’ status on the basis of the evidence adduced in the representation proceeding, provided, however, that upon a showing of good cause therefor the trial examiner or the Board in the exercise of a sound discretion may permit the introduction of additional evidence.
(b) On the remand should the floor-ladies be found to be supervisors so much of the Board’s order as rests upon their activities should be enforced; if otherwise found, the order should be modified as may be required.
2. In Part IV I would sustain the position of the Board as to the notice given by the Company to the employees, believing that it was within the competence of the Board in all the circumstances to find that the notice was coercive. The Board reached this conclusion, “Particularly in the light of the other unfair labor practices found.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9339308. Public record. Not legal advice.