Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. C & C Plywood Corporation

351 F.2d 224 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 10, 1965

Company v. N. L. R. B., supra, 332 F.2d at 364 .] But we find no support for the Board’s position in that language. … B. v. American National Ins.

J. M. Tanaka Construction, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, R. M. Tanaka Construction, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

675 F.2d 1029 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 26, 1982

Tanaka) petition for review of a National Labor Relations Board (Board) order. … Alter Ego The Board’s finding that R. M.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game v. Federal Subsistence Board

139 F.4th 773 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 2, 2025

Put another way, when the Board allows a subsistence hunt, but  STATE OF AK DEP’T OF FISH AND GAME V. FED. … Old Person v. Brown, 312 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (quotations omitted). However, we need not address this question today.

National Labor Relations Board v. Fleetwood Trailer Co., Inc.

366 F.2d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 8, 1966

On the basis of the Board’s own policy as stated in Brown and Root, supra, we hold that whether or not a vacancy exists must be determined at the time the strikers apply for work after the strike. … Chauffeurs, Team. & H., etc. v, N.L.R.B., 233 F.2d 233 (7th Cir. 1956), the Board and court found that a striker’s job had been absorbed and he was thus not entitled to preferential reinstatement when a job opening occurred

National Labor Relations Board v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 640, and Its Agent, Glynn Ross

464 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 18, 1972

These refusals continued after the Board obtained a district court order enjoining further picketing of Brown’s premises. … B. v. Construction & General Laborers’ Union Local 270, 398 F.2d 86 , 89 (9th Cir. 1968). See also N. L. R. B. v. Intalco Aluminum Corp., 446 F.2d 1232 (9th Cir. 1971).

National Labor Relations Board v. United Brotherhood Of Carpenters And Joiners Of America, Local 1913

531 F.2d 424 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 12, 1976

NLRB v. Brown & Root, Inc., 311 F.2d 447 (8th Cir. 1963). The burden then shifts to the discriminating employer or union to prove circumstances which would limit its liability. NLRB v. Brown & Root, Inc., supra; NLRB v. … Agwilines, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 87 F.2d 146, 151 (5th Cir. 1936).

M & R Investment Co. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

308 F.2d 49 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 19, 1962

BROWNING, Circuit Judge. … In Las Vegas Hacienda, Inc. v. C. A.

Romero v. Weakley

226 F.2d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 10, 1955

v. … As stated in Willcox v.

Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

638 F.2d 140 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 1981

See Keokuk Gas Service So. v. NLRB, 580 F.2d 328, 333 (8th Cir. 1978); Inter-Polymer Industries, Inc. v. NLRB, 480 F.2d 631, 633 (9th Cir. 1973). … Although such *142 conduct cannot be condoned, the Board reasonably found here that it was a response to Simi’s interference with protected activity. See NLRB v.

Brown v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.

291 F. App'x 45 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 18, 2008

See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the Bankruptcy Panel’s judgment. All pending motions are denied as moot. AFFIRMED.

National Labor Relations Board v. Carlton Wood Products Co.

201 F.2d 863 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 1953

Louis v. N.L.R.B., supra; N.L.R.B. v. Capitol Greyhound Lines, supra; cf. N.L.R.B. v. A. J. Tower Co., 1946, 329 U.S. 324 , 67 S.Ct. 324 , 91 L.Ed. 322 . Respondent relies upon N.L.R.B. v. … The Board may, therefore, properly order respondent to bargain. Frank Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702 , 64 S.Ct. 817 , 88 L.Ed. 435 ; N.L.R.B. v. P.

Quigley v. California Franchise Tax Board

14 F. App'x 910 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 20, 2001

Franchise Tax Bd. v. Alcan Aluminium, 493 U.S. 331 , 338, 110 S.Ct. 661 , 107 L.Ed.2d 696 (1990); Bosewell v. *911 LaSalle Nat’l Bank, 450 U.S. 503, 513 , 101 S.Ct. 1221 , 67 L.Ed.2d 464 (1981). … See City of Whittier v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 598 F.2d 561, 562 (9th Cir.1979).

Wagon Wheel Bowl, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Wagon Wheel Bowl, Inc.

47 F.3d 332 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 1995

Briggs Plumbingware, Inc. v. … Enloe Memorial Hosp. v. NLRB, 682 F.2d 790, 795 (9th Cir.1982); and NLRB v. Tahoe Nugget, Inc., 584 F.2d 293 , 305-06 (9th Cir.1978), cer t., denied, 442 U.S. 921 , 99 S.Ct. 2847 , 61 L.Ed.2d 290 (1979).

United Nurses Associations of California v. National Labor Relations Board

871 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 11, 2017

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. 2 UNITED NURSES ASS’NS OF CAL. V. … CVMC also attempts to distinguish a case cited by the Board, Pacific Molasses Co. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Moss Amber Mfg. Co.

264 F.2d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 27, 1959

N.L.R.B., supra; May Department Stores Co. v. N.L.R.B., 326 U.S. 376 , 66 S.Ct. 203 , 90 L.Ed. 145 ; Foreman & Clark, Inc. v. … Contentions similar to those made by the respondent in this case were made in Foreman & Clark, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., supra, and Harris Langenberg Hat Co. v. N.L.R.B., 8 Cir., 216 F.2d 146 .

National Labor Relations Board v. Tanner Motor Livery, Ltd.

349 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 29, 1965

The Board’s decision is reported at 148 NLRB No. 137 . … NLRB v. Lundy Manufacturing Co., supra. We note that none of the cases on which the Board relies is one in which there was an established collective-bargaining contract between the employer and a union.

National Labor Relations Board v. Nevis Industries, Inc.

647 F.2d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 8, 1981

We must enforce the Board’s order if the Board correctly applied the law, and if the Board’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence on the record viewed as a whole. E. g., NLRB v. … The Board’s interpretation of the Act is entitled to considerable deference. Ford Motor Co. v. NLRB, 441 U.S 488, 497, 99 S.Ct. 1842, 1849 , 60 L.Ed.2d 420 (1979); NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Nevis Industries, Inc.

647 F.2d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 8, 1981

Standard of Review. 11 We must enforce the Board's order if the Board correctly applied the law, and if the Board's findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence on the record viewed as a whole. E. g., NLRB v. … The Board's interpretation of the Act is entitled to considerable deference. Ford Motor Co. v. NLRB, 441 U.S. 488, 497 , 99 S.Ct. 1842, 1849 , 60 L.Ed.2d 420 (1979); NLRB v.

Chin Yi Tu v. National Transportation Safety Board

470 F.3d 941 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 13, 2006

Actually, anyone who had read Jones v. Flowers, 126 S. Ct. 19450 TU v. … Jones v. Flowers, 126 S. Ct. 1708, 1719 (2006).  TU v.

Bellingham Frozen Foods, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

626 F.2d 674 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 1980

See NLRB v. Dent, supra, 534 F.2d at 846 n.2. See also Int’l Assn. of Machinists v. NLRB, supra; Spitzer Akron, Inc. v. NLRB, 6 Cir., 1976, 540 F.2d 841, 845 ; NLRB v. … The Board’s determinations of this sort are entitled to great deference in light of its special expertise. See, Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass’n v.