# National Labor Relations Board v. Max Factor and Company v. Luisa Gratz, Intervenor

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 18, 1981 · 640 F.2d 197

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9467536

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. MAX FACTOR AND COMPANY, Respondent, v. Luisa GRATZ, Intervenor
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 18, 1981
- **Citations:** 640 F.2d 197
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Pregerson
- **Judges:** Goodwin, Pregerson, Schwarzer
- **Cited by:** 21 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/9467536

## Opinion text

PREGERSON, Circuit Judge
(dissenting):
The Board’s conclusion that deferral to the arbitration award would engender a result repugnant to the purposes and policies of the National Labor Relations act is, as the majority opinion points out, unsupported by “analysis of the [Spielberg] repugnance criterion.” I suggest that we need to know why the Board thought the arbitration award was repugnant to the Act before we determine whether the Board abused its discretion in refusing to defer to the arbitration award. Accordingly, I vote to remand with instructions that the Board state the reasons for its conclusions of repugnancy.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9467536. Public record. Not legal advice.