# National Labor Relations Board v. Tito Contractors, Inc.

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · February 3, 2017 · 847 F.3d 724

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9871854

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. TITO CONTRACTORS, INC., Respondent
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** February 3, 2017
- **Citations:** 847 F.3d 724; 208 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3233; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1931; 2017 WL 461110
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Henderson
- **Judges:** Henderson, Rogers, Ginsburg
- **Cited by:** 4 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/9871854

## Opinion text

KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I write separately to give a word to the wise: although the Board’s order, composed of two sentences of text and a footnote analysis of the unit-appropriateness issue (which analysis also acknowledges its dissenting colleague’s view) is apparently standard operating procedure at this stage, the Board will continue to run the risk of a court-imposed re-do if it persists — especially when, en route to the Board’s review, the HO, inter alia, likewise fails to consider adequately the offered proof. It might be better served by rethinking its drumhead procedure.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9871854. Public record. Not legal advice.