Case law

Precision Concrete v. National Labor Relations Board

362 F.3d 847 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 6, 2004

NLRB v. Fant Milling Co., 360 U.S. 301 (1959). … Obedient to Hensley v.

District of Columbia Employees' Compensation Appeals Board v. Henry

516 A.2d 941 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 1986

See Garrett v. Washington Air Compressor Co., 466 A.2d 462 , 462 n. 1 (D.C.1983); Carey v. Crane Service Co., 457 A.2d 1102 , 1103 n. 2 (D.C.1983). In November of 1969 when Ms. … Mason v. District of Columbia, 395 A.2d 399, 402 (D.C.1978). Ms.

U.S. Steel v. National Labor Relations Board

112 F. App'x 64 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 26, 2004

This cause was considered on the record from the National Labor Relations Board and on the briefs and arguments of the parties. … Insofar as the Petition for Review seeks modification of the Board’s order, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition be denied.

Brooks v. District of Columbia Board of Appeals & Review

317 A.2d 864 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 5, 1974

See Williams v. Zuckert, 372 U.S. 765 , 83 S.Ct. 1102 , 10 L. Ed. 136 (1963) (per curiam). See also Goldwasser v. … Brown, 135 U.S.App.D.C. 222 , 417 F.2d 1169 (1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 922 , 90 S.Ct. 918 , 25 L.Ed.2d 103 (1970). Petitioner’s final claim of error is that Dr.

Shamrock Foods Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

346 F.3d 1130 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 21, 2003

for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board Scott V. … The ALJ and the Board analyzed D’Anella’s discharge utilizing the framework approved by the Supreme Court in NLRB v. Burnup & Sims, 379 U.S. 21 (1964).

Pearson Education, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

373 F.3d 127 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 6, 2004

Co. v. … See NLRB v.

Martin v. District of Columbia Police & Firefighters' Retirement & Relief Board

532 A.2d 102 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 1987

Seabolt v. Police & Firemen’s Retirement & Relief Board, 413 A.2d 908, 910-11 (D.C.1980). … See id. at 139 & n. 3; Woody v. Police & Firemen’s Retirement & Relief Board, 441 A.2d 987, 989 (D.C.1982) (per curiam); Rzepecki v.

James C. Robinson v. National Transportation Safety Board

28 F.3d 210 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 22, 1994

Thus, the only “live” issue before the court is whether the Board’s revocation was lawful. Cf. Doe v. Sullivan, 938 F.2d 1370, 1375 (D.C.Cir.1991). … While the Board’s order could properly rest on circumstantial evidence, see Sorenson v. National Transp.

Progressive Electric, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

453 F.3d 538 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 14, 2006

BROWN, Circuit Judge. Progressive Electric, Inc. … But see Brown & Root, Inc. v.

Allied Industrial Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

476 F.2d 868 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 12, 1973

Brown, 380 U.S. 278 , 85 S.Ct. 980 , 13 L.Ed.2d 839 (1965). 16 Conduct by an employer which discourages a union activity protected by § 7 may also discourage and discriminate against membership in a labor organization. 17 … a whole. 24 NLRB v.

Monmouth Care Center v. National Labor Relations Board

672 F.3d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 9, 2012

On April 27, 2009, a two-member panel of the Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision. Monmouth Care Ctr., 354 N.L.R.B. No. 2 (Board Op. I). After the Supreme Court held in New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 130 S. … evidence,” Teamsters Local Union No. 175 v.

BP Amoco Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

217 F.3d 869 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 11, 2000

Seid, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, were on brief for the respondents. Anne M. Lofaso, Attorney, entered an appearance. Patrick M. Flynn entered an appearance for the interve- nors. Daniel V. … Printing Div. v. NLRB, 501 U.S. 190 (1991)).

Nova Plumbing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

330 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 10, 2003

Nova argues that the Board’s reliance on contract language alone directly contradicts International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union v. NLRB, 366 U.S. 731 (1961). … The Board cites Third and Tenth Circuit cases upholding Board rulings that contract language alone may establish the existence of a section 9(a) relationship in the construction industry. See NLRB v.

C.C. Eastern, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

60 F.3d 855 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 1, 1995

NLRB v. United Ins. Co. of Am., 390 U.S. 254, 256 , 88 S.Ct. 988, 989-90 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1083 (1968). … See Greater Boston Television Corp. v. FCC, 444 F.2d 841 , 851-52 (D.C.Cir.1970).

G.W. Galloway Company v. National Labor Relations Board

856 F.2d 275 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Sep 9, 1988

In NLRB v. … Co. v.

Lucky Cab Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

621 F. App'x 9 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 3, 2015

“This court’s review of a Board decision to determine whether it is supported by substantial evidence is highly deferential.” Parsippany Hotel Mgmt. Co. v. NLRB, 99 F.3d 413, 419 (D.C.Cir.1996). … “[T]he court will uphold the Board’s decision upon substantial evidence even if we would reach a different result upon de novo review.” Evergreen Am. Corp. v. NLRB, 362 F.3d 827, 837 (D.C.Cir.2004).

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Surface Transportation Board

96 F.3d 1528 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 11, 1996

R.Rs. v. I.C.C., 846 F.2d 1465 , 1467 (D.C.Cir.1988). … See Baltimore & Ohio R.R. v. I.C.C., 826 F.2d 1125 , 1126 n. 1 (D.C.Cir.1987).

Allen v. District of Columbia Hackers' License Appeal Board

471 A.2d 271 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 1984

See D.C.Code § l-1510(a) (1981); Debruhl v. … See Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954).

Flying Tiger Line, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

204 F.2d 404 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 7, 1953

We agree with the Board that, if every certificate automatically carried an unlimited special service provision, c'haos in regulation would result. … The Board’s order does not affect private or non-common carriage of either persons or property.

Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

581 F.2d 846 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 10, 1978

V 1975). … In American Airlines, Inc. v.