# National Labor Relations Board v. Baptist Hospital, Inc.

> Supreme Court of the United States · June 20, 1979 · 442 U.S. 773

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9427645

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Et Al. v. BAPTIST HOSPITAL, INC.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** June 20, 1979
- **Citations:** 442 U.S. 773; 101 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2556; 99 S. Ct. 2598; 61 L. Ed. 2d 251; 1979 U.S. LEXIS 7
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Blackmun
- **Judges:** Powell, Stewart, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Stevens, Burger, Brennan, White, Marshall
- **Cited by:** 94 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/9427645

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that there is “a ban on the prohibition of solicitation in areas other than immediate patient-care areas ‘where the [hospital] has not justified the prohibitions as necessary to avoid disruption of health care operations or disturbance of patients’ ”
- noting that “courts have the duty to review [agency] presumptions both ‘for consistency with the Act, and for rationality.’ ” (quoting Beth Israel Hosp. v. NLRB, 437 U.S. 483, 501, 98 S.Ct. 2463, 57 L.Ed.2d 370 (1978))

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice Blackmun,
concurring.
I join the Court’s opinion and its judgment. I write only to underline what is plainly said in the opinion, ante, at 789-790, and n. 16, that these hospital cases so often turn on the proof presented. What may be true of one hospital’s gift shop and cafeteria may not be true of another’s. And I continue to have difficulty perceiving any rational distinction between the Board’s recognition that solicitation is inappropriate in a department store, see Beth Israel Hospital v. NLRB, 437 U. S. 483, 511-512 , and nn. 2 and 3 (1978) (Powell, J., concurring in judgment); id., at 508 (concurring opinion), and its contrary presumption with respect to the retail shop (usually operated on a not-for-profit basis) and cafeteria in the hospital. The admonition contained in the last paragraph of n. 16 of the Court’s opinion, ante, at 790, cannot be overemphasized.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9427645. Public record. Not legal advice.