Case law

National Labor Relations Board v. Pine Products Corporation

361 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 12, 1966

PER CURIAM: The National Labor Relations Board has found that respondent violated section 8(a) (3) and (1) of the National 61 Stat. 140 , as amended, 73 Stat. 525 (1959), 29 U.S.C. § 158 (a) (3), (1) (1964), by discharging … On review the sole question is whether the Board’s findings are sup *481 ported by substantial evidence on the whole record. We conclude that they are and that the order is entitled to enforcement. It is so ordered.

National Labor Relations Board v. V. C. Britton Co.

352 F.2d 797 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 1, 1965

We think under Universal Camera v. N. L. R. B., 340 U.S. 474 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 , we must accept the board’s findings even though a reading of the transcript leaves some doubts in our mind. … As to Gonzales, we believe the situation is comparable to that of the discharged employees in Salinas Valley Broadcasting Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 9 Cir., 334 F.2d 604 .

National Labor Relations Board v. Ironworkers Local 433

169 F.3d 1217 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 12, 1999

SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge: In 1991, Petitioner National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) and Respondent Iron-workers Local 433 (“the Union”) entered into a consent decree, after this court upheld three NLRB orders finding the … See, e.g., Blankenship & Assocs., Inc. v. NLRB, 54 F.3d 447, 448-49 (7th Cir.1995); NLRB v. Monfort, Inc., 29 F.3d 525, 528-29 (10th Cir.1994); NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Bingham-Willamette Company

857 F.2d 661 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 20, 1988

We review de novo whether the Board applied the correct legal standard. Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co., 404 U.S. 157, 182 (1971). I. … Under NLRB v.

International In-Flight Catering Co. v. National Mediation Board

555 F.2d 712 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 10, 1977

They rely on Switchmen’s Union of North America v. National Mediation Board, 320 U.S. 297 , 64 S.Ct. 95 , 88 L.Ed. 61 (1943). … United States v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681 , 78 S.Ct. 983 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1077 (1958) (discovery rules).

Pioneer Inn Associates v. National Labor Relations Board

578 F.2d 835 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 19, 1978

Co. v. NLRB, 536 F.2d 1192, 1194 (7th Cir. 1976); Ingress-Plastene, Inc. v. NLRB, 430 F.2d 542, 547 (7th Cir. 1970). The Board has admitted as much in Sierra Development Co. d/b/a Club Cal-Neva, 231 NLRB No. 5 (1977). … We are bound to enforce the Board’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence viewing the record in its entirety. Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951); NLRB v.

Rucker (Andrew) v. Cochise County Board of Supervisors

723 F.2d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 12, 1983

723 F.2d 916 Rucker (Andrew) v. Cochise County Board of Supervisors NO. 82-5435 United States Court of Appeals, ninth Circuit. DEC 12, 1983 1 Appeal From: D.Ariz. 2 AFFIRMED.

Royse v. Board of Prison Terms and Paroles

703 F.2d 577 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 23, 1983

703 F.2d 577 Royse v. Board of Prison Terms and Paroles 81-3672 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Ninth Circuit 2/23/83 1 E.D.Wash. AFFIRMED

National Labor Relations Board v. Ironworkers Local 433

850 F.2d 551 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1988

V. … NLRB v. Financial Institution *558 Employees, 475 U.S. 192 , 106 S.Ct. 1007, 1013 , 89 L.Ed.2d 151 (1986) (rejecting rule promulgated by the Board because rule exceeded Board’s authority under NLRA).

Horizon Air Industries, Inc. v. National Mediation Board

232 F.3d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 21, 2000

Second, federal courts have jurisdiction to review allegations that the Board has acted unconstitutionally in carrying out an investigation. See America West v. … The Supreme Court’s rule is set out in Nat’l Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575 , 89 S.Ct. 1918 , 23 L.Ed.2d 547 (1969).

Douglas Aircraft Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

96 F.2d 1016 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 7, 1938

National Labor Relations Board v. Campbell & McLean, Inc.

215 F.2d 652 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 22, 1954

The petition of the Board for enforcement of its order is granted for the reasons given in the Board’s decision and order, 106 N.L.R.B. No. 171.

National Labor Relations Board v. Boise Implement Company

215 F.2d 652 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 22, 1954

215 F.2d 652 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Appellant, v. BOISE IMPLEMENT COMPANY, Appellee. No. 14154. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Sept. 22, 1954. … PER CURIAM. 1 The petition of the Board for enforcement of its order is granted for the reasons given in the Board's decision and order, 106 N.L.R.B. No. 114.

National Labor Relations Board v. Campbell & McLean Inc.

215 F.2d 652 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 22, 1954

215 F.2d 652 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. CAMPBELL & McLEAN, Inc., Respondent. No. 14143. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Sept. 22, 1954. … PER CURIAM. 1 The petition of the Board for enforcement of its order is granted for the reasons given in the Board's decision and order, 106 N.L.R.B. No. 171.

Retlaw Broadcasting Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

172 F.3d 660 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 30, 1999

Ass’n, Inc. v. NLRB, 939 F.2d 1392 , 1403-05 (10th Cir.1991). The possibility of impasse, therefore, is a bargaining tool for both sides and an “integral part” of collective bargaining on mandatory subjects. Brown v. … Brown v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders Int’l Union Local 54, 468 U.S. 491, 503 , 104 S.Ct. 3179 , 82 L.Ed.2d 373 (1984).

National Labor Relations Board v. Pacific Greyhound Lines, Inc.

106 F.2d 867 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 19, 1939

National Labor Relations Board v. Carlisle Lumber Co., 9 Cir., 99 F.2d 533, 538 . … We regard the contract, as modified, then to be binding on the employees and on the company and not affected by the fact that undetermined proceedings were pending before the Board. Consolidated Edison Co. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Campbell Soup Co.

378 F.2d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 23, 1967

Cf., Sunbeam Television Corp. v. FCC, 100 U.S. … NLRB v. Newspaper and Mail Deliverers Union, 192 F.2d 654 (2d Cir. 1951); Union Starch and Refining Company v.

Allied Concrete, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

607 F.2d 827 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 1979

Int’l Ass’n of Bridge, Etc. v. NLRB at 1159. Here the Board found that the Union’s picketing met the Moore Dry Dock criteria. *831 “The issue . . . … We cannot agree with the Board’s conclusion that “Schultz is dispositive of the instant matter.” Schultz did not establish a per se rule; and we have held, as stated in Int’l Ass’n of Bridge, Etc. v.

Golden Day Schools, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

644 F.2d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 8, 1981

*836 BROWNING, Chief Judge: Employees of Golden Day Schools, Inc., a proprietary child care facility, held meetings at which the benefits of unionization were discussed. … The Board’s determination of such a question will not be set aside “in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, such as unjust discrimination.” NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Silver Spur Casino

623 F.2d 571 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 27, 1980

We affirm the Board’s decision, but on a different basis. The Board cited Retired Persons Pharmacy v. … We enforce the Board’s order on this issue; substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the Board’s determination. V.