Case law

Sandusky Mall Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

242 F.3d 682 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 5, 2001

In order to accept the Board’s arguments, one must first accept the premise that Holly Farms governs that issue. This is not the case. … Holly Fams speaks only to the level of deference due to the Board’s interpretation of the NLRA; it does not address the deference due to the Board’s interpretation of judicially created exceptions.

National Labor Relations Board v. Health Care Logistics, Inc.

784 F.2d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 27, 1986

On this issue, we defer to the Board’s expertise on a charging party’s status “if it has ‘warrant [support] in the record’ and a reasonable basis in law.” Beverly Enterprises v. … In NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Covington Furniture Manufacturing Company

514 F.2d 995 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 28, 1975

nonmandatory subject where good faith bargaining had resulted in an agreement upon all mandatory subjects and was therefore unlawful; and That said conclusion is directly supported by the Supreme Court’s opinion in NLRB v. … Now, therefore, the petition for enforcement of the Board’s order is granted.

Lane Drug Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

391 F.2d 812 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 29, 1968

Lane petitioned the Board for an election, which the Board granted. … NLRB v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. (5th Cir. 1965), 346 F. 2d 936, 942 . See also NLRB v. S. S.

National Labor Relations Board v. M & B Contracting Corporation

653 F.2d 245 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 7, 1981

Since M & B has not challenged the Board’s findings of section 8(a)(3) and (1) violations in transferring and reprimanding Williamsen, those findings are entitled to summary enforcement. Larand Leisurelies, Inc. v. … We hold that the nature of this act of employee misconduct and the context in which it was committed clearly support the Board’s conclusion. Accordingly, we grant enforcement of the Board’s order in all respects. 1 .

Detroit Newspaper Publishers Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board

372 F.2d 569 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 17, 1967

Brown, 380 U.S. 278 , 85 S.Ct. 980 , 13 L.Ed.2d *571 839 (1965), and in (Buffalo Linen) NLRB v. Truck Drivers Local Union, 353 U.S. 87 , 77 S.Ct. 643 , 1 L.Ed.2d 676 (1957). … NLRB v. Insurance Agents’ Union, 361 U.S. 477, 497 , 80 S.Ct. 419 , 4 L.Ed.2d 454 (1960). See also NLRB v. Brown, 380 U.S. 278 , 85 S.Ct. 980 , 13 L.Ed.2d 839 (1965); American Ship Building Co. v.

Hamilton County Education Ass'n v. Hamilton County Board of Education

822 F.3d 831 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 2016

Brown, 554 U.S. 60, 67 (2008) (quoting Linn v. Plant Guard Workers, 383 U.S. 53, 62 (1966)). … Thomas v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Cincinnati Local 271

495 F.2d 763 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 16, 1974

P 10,052 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, The United States Playing Card Company, Intervenor, v. CINCINNATI LOCAL 271, LITHOGGRAPHERS & PHOTOENGRAVERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Respondents. No. 73-1922. … appearing to the court that the decision and order of the Board, reported at 204 NLRB No. 65 , are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, now therefore 2 It is ordered that the order of the Board be

National Labor Relations Board v. Avon Convalescent Center, Inc.

490 F.2d 1384 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 1974

In this case the National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of an order previously issued against respondent Avon Convalescent Center, Inc. The Board’s decision and order are reported at 200 N.L.R.B. No. 99. … We have reviewed the record and hold that the findings of fact of the Trial Examiner and the Board are not only supported by substantial evidence, they are compelled by it. Enforcement of the Board’s order is granted.

National Labor Relations Board v. Cook Family Foods, Ltd.

47 F.3d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 21, 1995

YHA, Inc. v. NLRB, 2 F.3d 168, 172 (6th Cir.1993) (quoting Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corp v. … See NLRB v. Norbar, Inc., 752 F.2d 235, 241 (6th Cir.1985); Union Carbide Corp. v. NLRB, 714 F.2d 657, 661-62 (6th Cir.1983); Delco Air Conditioning Div. v. NLRB, 649 F.2d 390, 393 (6th Cir.1981).

Bay Medical Center, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

588 F.2d 1174 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 28, 1978

Vincent’s Hospital v. … In NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Hudson Motor Car Co.

136 F.2d 385 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 22, 1943

National Licorice Company v. National Labor Relations Board, 309 U.S. 350, 362 , 60 S.Ct. 569, 576 , 84 L.Ed. 799 . … Phelps Dodge Corporation v. Labor Board, supra, Op. 313 U. S. p. 197, 61 S.Ct. 845 , 85 L.Ed. 1271 , 133 A.L.R. 1217 .

Brown-Forman Corporation v. Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission

883 F.2d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 1989

883 F.2d 504 BROWN-FORMAN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TENNESSEE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 87-5870, 87-5913. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. … States of America. 6 UPON CONSIDERATION of the decision of that Court vacating the prior decision of this court, it is ordered that this cause be REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings in light of Healy v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Container Corporation of America

649 F.2d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 18, 1981

National Association of Letter Carriers v. Austin, 418 U.S. 264 , 94 S.Ct. 2770 , 41 L.Ed.2d 745 (1974). … N.L.R.B. v. Otsego Ski Club-Hidden Valley, Inc., 542 F.2d 18 (6th Cir. 1976). See also N.L.R.B. v. Elias Bros. Big Boy, Inc., 327 F.2d 421 (6th Cir. 1964). Young testified that Grundy never threatened him personally.

KI (USA) Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

35 F.3d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 1994

BAILEY BROWN, Senior Circuit Judge. … In Dayton Hudson Dep’t Store Co. v.

Fox v. Traverse City Area Public Schools Board of Education

605 F.3d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 2010

Wilburn v. Robinson, 489 F.3d 1140, 1149 (D.C. Cir. 2007); see also Charles v. … See Haynes, 474 F.3d at 362 (citing Taylor v.

Leslie Warthman v. Genoa Township Board of Truste

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 2008

No. 07-4528 Warthman v. Genoa Township Board of Trustees Page 9 On appeal, the Board expands on this theory. … Genoa Township Board of Trustees Page 11 cause of action in the text of their complaints. See, e.g., Brown v. Vickers Employees Credit Union, 162 F. Supp. 2d 528, 530 (S.D.

Pontiac Osteopathic Hospital v. National Labor Relations Board

23 F. App'x 517 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 2001

The Petitioner, the Board, and the Intervenor, having advised this Court of their desire to dispose of this matter by entry of a judgment granting the petition for review and denying enforcement of the Board’s order in full … , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED by the Court that the petition for review is granted and that enforcement of the Board’s order is denied.

National Labor Relations Board v. Eastown Distributors, Co.

16 F. App'x 346 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 2001

CONSENT JUDGMENT This court having on June 2, 1998, in Nos. 96-6704 and 97-5140, entered its judgment enforcing the Board’s Decision and Order issued in Board Case Nos. 7-CA-31719(2)-(7), et seq., against respondent Eastown … 26, 2001, and the Board having applied to this court for the entry of a consent judgment, upon consideration of said application and stipulation: It is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED by the court that the respondent Eastown

National Labor Relations Board v. Rotary Press, Inc.

524 F.2d 1342 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 5, 1975

judgment by default should not be granted, and it further appearing that to date the respondent has not responded thereto, It is ordered that the petitioner’s motion for judgment by default be and it hereby is granted and the Board