Case law

Ozark Automotive Distributors, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

779 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 10, 2015

Milakshmi V. Rajapakse, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were John H. … Unable to seek direct review of the Board’s certification decision, see Boire v.

Amalgamated Clothing Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

365 F.2d 898 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 27, 1966

The scope of Leedom v. Kyne is a restricted one. Boire v. Greyhound Corp., supra. . See AFL v. … Courts do not rely upon theories in support of Board action advanced for the first time by Board counsel on appeal. See e.g., NLRB v. Metropolitan Life Ins.

Rush University Medical Center v. National Labor Relations Board

833 F.3d 202 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 16, 2016

Ass’n v. NLRB, 499 U.S. 606, 608 (1991); San Miguel Hosp. Corp. v. NLRB, 697 F.3d 1181, 1184 (D.C. Cir. 2012). … We “accord the Board an especially ‘wide degree of discretion’” on questions of representation. Randell Warehouse of Ariz., Inc. v. NLRB, 252 F.3d 445, 447-48 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (quoting NLRB v. A.J.

Amazing Stores, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

887 F.2d 328 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 20, 1989

We find that imposition of a Gissel bargaining order was warranted and that the Board’s order should be enforced. Background In NLRB v. … Agnes Medical Center v.

Intercollegiate Broadcast System, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board

571 F.3d 69 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 10, 2009

Inc. v. … The Board’s response on appeal misses the mark.

Erie Brush & Manufacturing Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

700 F.3d 17 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 27, 2012

Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States, 371 U.S. 156, 168–69 (1962) (citing SEC v. Chenery, 332 U.S. 194, 196 (1947)); see also Jochims v. NLRB, 480 F.3d 1161, 1169 (D.C. Cir. 2007). … See Vincent Industrial Plastics, Inc. v. NLRB, 209 F.3d 727, 738 (D.C. Cir. 2000).

International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, AFL v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. B.V.D. Company, Inc.

237 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 3, 1956

It decided in National Labor Relations Board v. … Pre-amendment decisions: Republic Steel Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 3 Cir., 1939, 107 F.2d 472, 479 ; National Labor Relations Board v.

United Transportation Union v. Surface Transportation Board

114 F.3d 1242 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 13, 1997

Workers v. ICC, 862 F.2d 330 (D.C.Cir.1988). … In Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v.

Kohler Company v. National Labor Relations Board

345 F.2d 748 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 20, 1965

345 F.2d 748 120 U.S.App.D.C. 259 KOHLER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. … Camera Corp. v.

International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, District Lodge 64 v. National Labor Relations Board

50 F.3d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 7, 1995

Brown & Sharpe Mfg. Co., 312 N.L.R.B. 444 , 445, 1993 WL 382495 (1993) (“Brown & Sharpe II”) (quoting Fitzgerald v. Seamans, 553 F.2d 220, 228 (D.C.Cir.1977)). … See, e.g., Hohri v.

Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

340 F.2d 789 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 3, 1964

In fixing rates for a past period the Board may take into account actual experience. See Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. … V, 1959-63). 2 .

Northeast Beverage Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

554 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 30, 2009

Mail Contractors of America v. NLRB, 514 F.3d 27, 31 (D.C.Cir.2008). We conclude the Board erred in applying NLRB v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 , 82 S.Ct. 1099 , 8 L.Ed.2d 298 (1962) to the facts of this case. … law to the facts of the case,” Jochims v.

Century Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

656 F.2d 898 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 22, 1981

656 F.2d 898 Century Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board 80-1668, 80-1684, 80-1685 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS District of Columbia Circuit 5/22/81 1 C.A.B. AFFIRMED

Honeywell International, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

253 F.3d 125 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 29, 2001

Edison v. NLRB, 460 U.S. 693, 703 (1983). … See Nolde Bros., Inc. v.

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Surface Transportation Board

75 F.3d 696 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 16, 1996

Cf Argento v. … Kungys v.

Stanford Hospital & Clinics v. National Labor Relations Board

370 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 14, 2004

Ca. v. NLRB, 335 F.3d 1079, 1082–83 (D.C. Cir. 2003). Although we defer to the Board’s judgment regarding the proper scope of a bargaining unit, see South Prairie Constr. Co. v. … See Quick v. NLRB, 245 F.3d 231, 247 (3d Cir. 2001) (evidence of one occasion ‘‘is not evidence of ‘past practice’ ’’); see also Dallas Aerospace, Inc. v.

James Banyard v. National Labor Relations Board, McLean Trucking Company, Intervenor. Clay D. Ferguson v. National Labor Relations Board

505 F.2d 342 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 14, 1974

If it were not present, the Board’s abstention might constitute [ ] not deference, *346 but abdication.” 19 Moreover, shortly thereafter in Local Union 715 v. … Associated Press v. NLRB, 160 U.S.App.D.C. 396, 401 , 492 F.2d 662 , 667 (1974). . Ibid. . Local Union 2188, AFL-CIO v. NLRB, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 168, 172 , 494 F.2d 1087, 1091 (1974). . Local Union 715, AFL-CIO v.

Wackenhut Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

178 F.3d 543 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 8, 1999

.' " Pittsburgh Press Co. v. … Disabili- ties Servs. v. NLRB, 905 F.2d 476, 478 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citation omitted)). We affirm the legal conclusions of the Board if they are "reasonably defensible." Ford Motor Co. v.

B. Willis, C.P.A., Inc. v. Surface Transportation Board

51 F. App'x 321 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 26, 2002

The Board argues that § 10501(a) is the only provision granting the Board jurisdiction, and that § 10501(b) does not expand the Board’s jurisdiction, but only renders the jurisdiction granted in § 10501(a) exclusive. … This interpretation is implausible on its face, and the Board, in determining that it has no jurisdiction over private tracks, has rejected it. See Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. FERC, 28 F.3d 1281 , 1284 (D.C.Cir.1994).

Loyal Travel, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

578 F.2d 442 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 21, 1978

578 F.2d 442 188 U.S.App.D.C. 200 Loyal Travel, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board No. 77-1492 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit 6/21/78 1 C.A.B. AFFIRMED