Case law

U-Haul Co. of Nevada, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

490 F.3d 957 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 2007

We review the Board’s Decision and Order for abuse of discretion. See Canadian Am. Oil Co. v. NLRB, 82 F.3d 469, 473 (D.C. Cir. 1996). … Co. v. NLRB, 736 F.2d 343, 348 (1984).

Stephens v. US Airways Group, Inc.

908 F. Supp. 2d 10 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 7, 2012

See Taylor v. D.C. … See id. at 442 n. 1 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) ("Judge Brown's opinion is the controlling opinion in this case because it presents the narrowest grounds of the opinions forming a majority.” (citing Marks v.

Waremart Foods v. National Labor Relations Board

354 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 16, 2004

In the Board’s view, Lechmere, Inc. v. … Unless California law is what the Board says it is, this case is indistinguishable from Lechmere and the Board’s decision is in error. See ITT Industries, Inc. v. NLRB, 251 F.3d 995, 1000-03 (D.C.Cir.2001).

Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, CO v. EPA

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 30, 2023

Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 280 (1994). In other words, “retroactive rules alter the past legal consequences of past actions.” Arkema, Inc. v. EPA, 618 F.3d 1, 7 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (quoting Bowen v. … Califano v. Yamasaki, 442 U.S. 682, 702 (1979); see also California v. Texas, 141 S.

King Curb v. National Labor Relations Board

291 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 7, 2002

The Board has "a wide degree of discretion in establishing the procedure and safeguards necessary to insure the fair and free choice of bargaining representatives by employees." See NLRB v. A.J. … Cir. 2000); DIC Enter- tainment v. NLRB, 238 F.3d 434, 436 (D.C. Cir. 2001).

Scahill v. Dist. of Columbia

286 F. Supp. 3d 12 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 2017

Brown , 19 A.3d at 357 . … See Brown , 19 A.3d at 356-57 (collecting cases); Gallothom, Inc. v. D.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control Bd. , 820 A.2d 530 , 535 (D.C. 2003) (274-day delay non-prejudicial).

Association Of American Railroads v. Surface Transportation Board

162 F.3d 101 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 11, 1998

The Board is left to decipher which "employees [ ] may be affected thereby." 28 Under the ruling of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. … Workers v. ICC, 862 F.2d 330 (D.C.Cir.1988). The Board reiterated this proposition at oral argument.

Precision Concrete v. National Labor Relations Board

362 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 2003

Galloway Co. v. NLRB, 856 F.2d 275, 279 (D.C. … In Drug Plastics, 30 F.3d at 172–73, we upheld the Board’s test pursuant to Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v.

Waremart Foods v. National Labor Relations Board

354 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 1, 2003

In the Board’s view, Lechmere, Inc. v. … Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 (1972),  4 and Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455 (1980).

Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Surface Transportation Board, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Intervenors

93 F.3d 793 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 20, 1996

We note that the decision we reach here is altogether consistent with our recent holding in Birt v. Surface Transportation Board, 90 F.3d 580 (D.C.Cir.1996). … See also Busboom Grain Co. v.

Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

510 F.2d 1260 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 4, 1975

Id. at 10 , App. at 61; see Aloha Airlines, Inc. v. … Aloha Airlines, Inc. v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., 489 F.2d 203, 211 (9th Cir. 1973) (emphasis added).

Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America v. National Labor Relations Board

419 F.2d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 13, 1969

The company argues that in any event its Section 8(a) (1) violations may not serve as a predicate for the Board’s order to bargain. The Supreme Court last term made it clear in NLRB v. … See Regal Knitware Co. v. N.L.R.B., 324 U.S. 9, 14 , 65 S.Ct. 478 , 89 L.Ed. 661 (1945); Bullock v.

Richard D. Peterson v. Hugh F. Rivers, D.C. Board of Parole

350 F.2d 457 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 5, 1965

After our decision in Richardson v. … It would take an extraordinary case indeed to lead the courts to become embroiled in Parole Board actions on the basis of claims lacking a constitutional foundation. Affirmed.

American Importers Association v. Civil Aeronautics Board

495 F.2d 1025 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 12, 1974

opinion of November 29, 1972, American Importers Ass’n v. … Upon consideration of the foregoing the order of the Board approving the agreement, as conditioned by the Board, is Affirmed. 1 .

APF Carting, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

60 F. App'x 832 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 21, 2003

Further, Petitioners contend that the Board’s remedy was overbroad. Because the Board’s findings all survive the appropriate standard of review, United Food & Commercial Workers Int’l Union v. … The Board’s remedial order, which seeks to restore the status quo, falls within its remedial powers. Va. Elec. & Power Co. v. NLRB, 319 U.S. 533, 539-40 , 63 S.Ct. 1214 , 87 L.Ed. 1568 (1943).

Post Tension of Nevada, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

331 F. App'x 3 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 4, 2009

The employer contends the Board’s findings are unsupported by substantial evidence. In accord with our “highly deferential” standard of review, Capital Cleaning Contractors, Inc., v. … relationship,” NLRB v.

AOTOP, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board

331 F.3d 100 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 10, 2003

Co. v. NLRB, 140 F.3d 259, 264–65 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (citations and quotations omitted). … See Colquest Energy, Inc. v.

Brewers & Maltsters, Local Union No. 6 v. National Labor Relations Board

414 F.3d 36 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 5, 2005

Servs., Inc. v. NLRB, 317 F.3d 316, 322 (D.C.Cir.2003). The court’s review of the Board’s determinations in an unfair labor practice proceeding is limited, DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. … In evaluating the Board’s chosen remedy, the court “give[s] great deference to [its] selection.” Caterair Int’l v. NLRB, 22 F.3d 1114, 1120 (D.C.Cir.1994); see also Phelps Dodge Corp. v.

L. P. Steuart & Bro., Inc. v. Bowles

140 F.2d 703 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 18, 1944

Brown, Administrator, v. Wilemon, 5 Cir., 139 F.2d 730 . Act of May 31, 1941, 55 Stat. 236 , which amended the Act of Tune 28, 1940, 54 Stat. 676 . Perkins v. Brown, D.G.,S.D.Ga., 53 F.Supp. 176 . … Wright v. Securities & Exchange Commission, 2 Cir., 112 F.2d 89 ; Nichols & Co. v. Secretary of Agriculture, 1 Cir., 131 F.2d 651 ; Nelson v. Secretary of Agriculture, 7 Cir., 133 F.2d 453 .

American Baptist Homes of the West v. National Labor Relations Board

858 F.3d 612 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 6, 2017

Co. v. FCC, 129 F.3d 625, 629 (D.C. … Power v. FERC, 493 F.3d 239, 268 (D.C. Cir. 2007); Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. DOT, 137 F.3d 640, 648 (D.C. Cir. 1998).