Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. Thompson Products, Inc.

141 F.2d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 24, 1944

Wright v. Vinton Branch, 300 U.S. 440, 463 , 57 S.Ct. 556 , 81 L.Ed. 736 , 112 A.L.R. 1455 ; McCaughn v. Hershey Chocolate Co., 283 U.S. 488, 493 , 51 S.Ct. 510 , 75 L.Ed. 1183 ; Duplex Printing Press Co. v. … Dickerson, 310 U.S. 554 , 60 S.Ct. 1034 , 84 L.Ed. 1356 ; United States v. Vulte, 233 U.S. 509 , 34 S.Ct. 664 , 58 L.Ed. 1071 ; Belknap v. United States, 150 U.S. 588 , 14 S. Ct. 183 , 37 L.Ed. 1191 ; Dunwoody v.

A. v. Costantini v. Civil Aeronautics Board

679 F.2d 896 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 1982

V. Costantini v. Civil Aeronautics Board 80-7754 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Ninth Circuit 4/7/82 1 C.A.B. AFFIRMED

United States v. US Board of Water Comm'r

893 F.3d 578 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 2018

At 890 F.3d 1152, replace “over which the Board lacks statutory authority” with “over which the Board lacks permitting and licensing authority.” 18 NEV. STATE ENG’R V. U.S. BD. … See, e.g., Prosole v. Steamboat Canal Co., 140 P. 720, 722 (Nev. 1914) (superseded by statute on other grounds); Strait v. Brown, 16 Nev. 317, 324 (1881); Lobdell v. Simpson, 2 Nev. 274, 279 (1866); see also Nebraska v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Lettie Lee, Inc.

140 F.2d 243 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 29, 1944

International Ass’n of Machinists v. National Labor Relations Board, 311 U.S. 72 , 61 S.Ct. 83 , 85 L.Ed. 50 ; H. J. *247 Heinz Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 311 U.S. 514 , 61 S.Ct. 320 , 85 L.Ed. 309 . … .; Phelps Dodge Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 313 U.S. 177 , 61 S.Ct. 845 , 85 L.Ed. 1271 , 133 A.L.R. 1217 . 8 Compare N. L. R. B. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Friendly Cab Co.

512 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 8, 2008

Board”). … V.

National Labor Relations Board v. Aaron Brothers Corp.

563 F.2d 409 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 21, 1977

B. v. Smith Industries, Inc., 403 F.2d 889, 892 (5th Cir. 1968); N. L. R. B. v. … The Board will not set an election aside unless misconduct “constitute[d] an interference with free choice, for or against a bargaining representative . . . .” N. L. R. B. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. D. B. Lewis

249 F.2d 832 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 29, 1957

Edwards v. National Labor Relations Board, 5 Cir., 189 F.2d 970 ; Jackson Packing Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 5 Cir., 204 F.2d 842 . … In National Labor Relations Board v. Gunaca, 7 Cir., 230 F.2d 542 , it affirmed, on the opinion below, N.L.R.B. v.

Newspaper & Periodical Drivers & Helpers Union, Local No. 921 v. National Labor Relations Board

509 F.2d 99 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 23, 1974

The supplemental decision and order followed our remand of an earlier Board decision and order. Brown v. N. L. R. B., 462 F.2d 699 (CA9 1972). … The Board draws on a unique fund of expertise, and its choice of remedy must be given special respect by the reviewing courts. Marriott Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 491 F.2d 367 , 371 (CA9 1974).

National Labor Relations Board v. Tom Johnson, Inc.

378 F.2d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 17, 1967

The Board, however, did not accept these findings. … Co. v. NLRB, 6 Cir., 1958, 252 F.2d 428 -431. This we have done.

National Labor Relations Board v. Brooks Cameras, Inc.

691 F.2d 912 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 4, 1982

Brooks argues that issuance of the remedial order was an abuse of the Board’s discretion. The Board’s selection of a remedy for unfair labor practices is entitled to considerable deference. NLRB v. … NLRB, 665 F.2d 970 , 976 (9th Cir. 1982); NLRB v. Tischler, 615 F.2d at 512 . This court’s role in reviewing remedial orders issued by the Board, however, is not merely that of a “rubber stamp.” Rayner v.

Shell Oil Company v. National Labor Relations Board

457 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 24, 1972

The Board found that Shell Oil Company refused to bargain with the Oil, Chemical and *616 Atomic Workers International Union. We decline to enforce the Board’s order. I. … B. v. Local 85, 454 F.2d 875 (9th Cir. 1972); N. L. R. B. v. Teamsters Local 85, 448 F.2d 789 (9th Cir. 1971); Sonoco Products Company v. N. L. R. B., 443 F.2d 1334 (9th Cir. 1971).

National Labor Relations Board v. Belcor, Inc.

652 F.2d 856 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 7, 1981

N.L.R.B. v. … See N.L.R.B. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Donkin's Inn, Inc.

532 F.2d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 28, 1976

The Board contends, and the Company denies, that Carman was an agent authorized to “accept” a contract on behalf of the Company. Issues regarding agency are generally treated as fact issues. NLRB v. … NLRB v. Strong, 393 U.S. 357, 359 , 89 S.Ct. 541 , 21 L.Ed.2d 546 (1969); H. J. Heinz v. National Labor Relations Board, 311 U.S. 514, 523-26 , 61 S.Ct. 320 , 85 L.Ed. 309 (1941).

National Labor Relations Board v. Super Toys, Inc.

458 F.2d 180 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 29, 1972

It follows that the hearing examiner’s conclusions, adopted by the Board, cannot be sustained. (Cf. Santa Fe Drilling Co. v. N. L. R. B. (9th Cir. 1969) 416 F.2d 725, 732 ; N.L.R.B. v. … We decline to enforce the remainder of the Board’s order. 1 . Among the circuits that have adopted the Struksnes criteria are the Seventh (N.L.R.B. v. C & P Plaza Dept. Store, Div. of C & P Shop.

Carpinteria Lemon Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board

240 F.2d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 11, 1956

National Labor Relations Board v. Harris Woodson Co., 4 Cir., 179 F.2d 720 ; Continental Oil Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 10 Cir., 113 F.2d 473 . … May Department Stores Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 326 U.S. 376 , 66 S.Ct. 203 , 90 L.Ed. 145 .

GUILLERMO URENDA-BUSTOS V. MERRICK GARLAND

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 22, 2022

See Rodriguez-Matamoros v. … I.N.S., 86 F.3d 158, 161 (9th Cir. 1996) (remanding where BIA’s conclusory statement did not enable the “reviewing court to see that the Board has heard, considered, and decided” (quoting Villanueva-Franco v.

Hecla Mining Company v. National Labor Relations Board

564 F.2d 309 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 8, 1977

This court uniformly has made a close examination of the record to determine whether in fact the conclusions of the examiner and the Board are fairly supported by the record, e. g. NLRB v. Sauk Valley Manu. … In NLRB v.

Portland Willamette Company v. National Labor Relations Board

534 F.2d 1331 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 14, 1976

Therefore, the majority found the action of the Company unlawful under NLRB v. Erie Resistor Corp., 373 U.S. 221 , 83 S.Ct. 1139 , 10 L.Ed.2d 308 (1963), and NLRB v. … Upon the facts of this case, we conclude, as we did in NLRB v.

Jerrold S. Flemming v. Oregon Board of Parole

998 F.2d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 12, 1993

Flem[m]ing v. Board of Parole, 102 Or.App. 691 , 795 P.2d 122 , review denied, 310 Or. 475 , 799 P.2d 646 (1990). … (citing Raske v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Trw-Semiconductors, Inc.

385 F.2d 753 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 24, 1967

B. v. … The question is not free from doubt, 2 but we believe that, because free speech is involved, both we and the Board should heed the Supreme Court’s dictum, regarding section 8(c), in Linn v.