Case law

Service Employees International Union, Local 525 v. National Labor Relations Board

52 F. App'x 357 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 3, 2002

See Local 761 (Machine Workers) v. NLRB, 366 U.S. 667 , 81 S.Ct. 1285 , 6 L.Ed.2d 592 (1961); NLRB v. Ironworkers Local 433, 850 F.2d 551 , 554 (9th Cir.1988). … SEIU also argues that the landlords, tenants, and their attorneys made themselves “allies” of the employers under General Teamsters Local 959 v.

National Labor Relations Board v. J. Byron Klaue, D/B/A Electro Mart

523 F.2d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 22, 1975

THE DISCHARGE OF RAGO In order to establish a violation of Section 8(a)(3) and 8(a)(1) the Board has the burden of showing that the discharge was illegally motivated. Famet, Inc. v. … This court remanded to the Board with directions to consider the case on the merits “as though the exceptions were timely filed.” Klaue v. N.L.R.B., No. 72-1999. 2 .

Oscar White, and All Others Similarly Situated v. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Secretary of State

468 F.2d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 29, 1972

People v. Anderson, 6 Cal.3d 628 , 100 Cal.Rptr. 152 , 493 P.2d 880 (1972). … See, e. g., Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 , 92 S.Ct. 1361 , 31 L.Ed.2d 636 (1972); Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150 , 90 S.Ct. 827 , 25 L.Ed.2d 184 (1970).

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. ELLIOTT P. CORP.

82 F.2d 193 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 9, 1936

Bender, 287 U.S. 551 , 53 S.Ct. 225 , 77 L.Ed. 489 , and Helvering v. Falk, 291 U.S. 183 , 54 S.Ct. 353 , 78 L.Ed. 719 ; Brown v. Helvering, 291 U.S. 193 , 54 S.Ct. 356 , 78 L.Ed. 725 . … The latter case leads to the conclusion adopted by the Board of Tax Appeals.

Great Western Broadcasting Corporation, D/B/A Kxtv v. National Labor Relations Board

356 F.2d 434 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 9, 1966

The Board did so on the basis of its conclusion that, in N. L. R. B. v. Servette, Inc., 377 U.S. 46, 54-57 , 84 S.Ct. 1098 , 12 L.Ed.2d 121 ; 2 and N. L. R. B. v. … binding upon the Board.

Vinod C. Bhan, C.R.N.A. v. Nme Hospitals, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Dba Manteca Hospital

772 F.2d 1467 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 2, 1985

Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc., 429 U.S. 477, 488 , 97 S.Ct. 690, 697 , 50 L.Ed.2d 701 (1977), quoting Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 320 , 82 S.Ct. 1502, 1521 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962). … See Magit v. Board of Medical Examiners, 57 Cal.2d 74, 83 , 17 Cal.Rptr. 488, 491 , 366 P.2d 816, 819 (1961); Chalmers-Francis v.

Robert O. Gilmore, Jr. v. Thomas C. Lynch

400 F.2d 228 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 16, 1968

The regulation here is statewide in its application and is as effective and authoritative in its establishment of state policy as if it had been announced by a board of more than one member. See McCormick & Co. v. … Brown, 52 F.2d 934, 937 (4th Cir. 1931), aff’d (without noting the particular point), 286 U.S. 131 , 52 S.Ct. 522 , 76 L.Ed. 1017 (1932) 4 *231 Second, appellees contend that appellant’s motion for a three-judge court was

Healy Tibbitts Builders, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs

444 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 2006

That is strikingly similar to the work that Maumau performed in this case. 18 In Stewart v. Brown & Root, Inc., 7 B.R.B.S. 356, 365 (1978), and Joyner v. … (footnote omitted) (emphasis added). 29 We disagree that McGray Construction overruled the Board's decisions in Hawkins and the Brown & Root cases.

Carpinteria Lemon Association, a Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Carpinteria Lemon Association, a Corporation, Seaboard Lemon Association, a Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Seaboard Lemon Association, a Corporation, Oxnard Citrus Association v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Oxnard Citrus Association, Somis Lemon Association, a Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Somis Lemon Association, a Corporation, Santa Clara Lemon Association, a Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Santa Clara Lemon Association, a Corporation

240 F.2d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 7, 1957

240 F.2d 554 CARPINTERIA LEMON ASSOCIATION, a corporation, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. … National Labor Relations Board v. Harris-Woodson Co., 4 Cir., 179 F.2d 720 ; Continental Oil Co. v.

Scott v. El Farra Enterprises, Inc.

863 F.2d 670 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 19, 1988

[Citing Kennedy v. Los Angeles Joint Executive Board, 192 F.Supp. 339 , 341 (S.D.Cal.1961).] … Id. at 517 n. 1 (citing Brown v. Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Co., 218 F.2d 542 (9th Cir.1954)).

Medic Air Corp. v. Air Ambulance Authority

843 F.2d 1187 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 4, 1988

Brown, 317 U.S. 341 , 63 S.Ct. 307 , 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943). The pendent claims were dismissed for want of federal jurisdiction. Medic Air appeals. Analysis First. … The Health Department and the District Board are in turn supervised by the State Board of Health. Id.

Diaz v. San Jose Unified School District

705 F.2d 1129 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 10, 1983

Penick, 443 U.S. 449 , 99 S.Ct. 2941 , 61 L.Ed.2d 666 (1979), and Dayton Board of Education v. … Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294 , 75 S.Ct. 753 , 99 L.Ed. 1083 (1955) (Brown II), are under an affirmative duty to “eradicate the effects of that system.”

Donald O. Oxford v. Carson Construction Co., and Alaska Industrial Board

226 F.2d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 30, 1955

The Board found that claimant had suffered no injury arising out of and in the course of his employment, and it denied relief. On review the trial court remanded the cause to the Board for further findings. … On the basis of these findings the court below upheld the Board’s decision. The Board’s findings have support in the record.

Guerra v. Board of Trustees of the California State Universities & Colleges

567 F.2d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 23, 1977

Kerr v. United States, 426 U.S. 394 , 96 S.Ct. 2119 , 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90, 95-96 , 88 S.Ct. 269 , 19 L.Ed.2d 305 (1967); Roche v. … Bauman v. United States District Court, supra.

National Labor Relations Board v. The Anthony Company D/B/A Eldorado Club

557 F.2d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 18, 1977

discrimination.’ ” NLRB v. … United Ass’n of Journeymen & Apprentices, etc. v. NLRB, 553 F.2d 1202 (9th Cir. 1977); NLRB v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union No. 403

710 F.2d 1418 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 22, 1983

In NLRB v. … V. Conclusion The Board’s Order is enforced in full.

Dean K. Buckley v. National Labor Relations Board, and System 99, Intervenor

432 F.2d 409 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 24, 1970

NLRB, 347 U.S. 17 , 74 S.Ct. 323 , 98 L.Ed. 455 (1954); Corn Products Refining Co. v. FTC, 324 U.S. 726 , 65 S.Ct. 961 , 89 L.Ed. 1320 (1954), and NLRB v. … NLRB v. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp., 368 U.S. 318 , 82 S.Ct. 344 , 7 L.Ed.2d 312 (1961); NLRB v. Jan Power, Inc., 421 F.2d 1058 (CA 1970).

Wrenn v. Oregon Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

315 F. App'x 609 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 2009

In denying Wrenn’s ex post facto claim, the Oregon Court of Appeals relied on Butler v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 194 Or.App. 164 , 94 P.3d 149 (2004). … Dep’t of Corr. v. Morales, 514 U.S. 499 , 115 S.Ct. 1597 , 131 L.Ed.2d 588 (1995).

National Labor Relations Board v. Max Factor and Company v. Luisa Gratz, Intervenor

640 F.2d 197 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 18, 1981

Lewis, Inc. v. NLRB, supra; Hawaiian Hauling Service, Ltd. v. NLRB, supra. A fuller statement by the Board of its reasons for this conclusion would, as Judge Pregerson states, have been helpful. Cf. … While we have the power to modify an order of the Board in an appropriate case, see NLRB v. Western Clinical Laboratory, Inc., 571 F.2d 457 (9th Cir. 1978); NLRB v.

Vickars-Henry Corporation v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

629 F.2d 629 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 6, 1980

The Board contends that V-H lacks standing to bring this appeal. … Secondly, as long as V-H still owns 16% of Pioneer Bank’s stock, it may well be subject to a future Board determination that V-H has sufficient “control” over the Bank to require that V-H again be subject to Board regulation