§

Austin Fire Equipment, LLC

360 N.L.R.B. 1176 (N.L.R.B. 2014)
Austin Fire Equipment, LLC

11 Cited authorities

  1. Pierce v. Underwood

    487 U.S. 552 (1988)   Cited 9,216 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when Congress reenacts a statute without changing its language, and when there is no indication that “Congress thought it was doing anything ... except reenacting and making permanent” the earlier legislation, a court should not give weight to legislative history pertaining to the reenactment

  2. Hickerson v. City of New York

    525 U.S. 1067 (1999)   Cited 89 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that jurisdiction to grant a divorce may exist without jurisdiction to adjudicate the parties' property rights

  3. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  4. Nova Plumbing, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    330 F.3d 531 (D.C. Cir. 2003)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that contractual language alone cannot establish a § 9 relationship where the union actually lacks majority support

  5. Hoang Ha v. Schweiker

    707 F.2d 1104 (9th Cir. 1983)   Cited 49 times
    Declining to award fees when the government argues for "a novel but credible extension or interpretation of the law"

  6. Timms v. United States

    742 F.2d 489 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 30 times

    No. 83-2029. Argued and Submitted December 15, 1983. Decided September 5, 1984. Fred Luyties, Molloy, Jones, Donahue, Trachita, Childers Mallamo, Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiffs-appellants. Kristina E. Harrigan, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Before HUG, PREGERSON, and NORRIS, Circuit Judges. HUG, Circuit Judge: After prevailing in a tax refund suit, appellants sought recovery of attorneys' fees under

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Triple A Fire Protection, Inc.

    136 F.3d 727 (11th Cir. 1998)   Cited 14 times
    Finding per se violation of the NLRA's prohibition against direct dealing where employer "deal[t] directly with employees outside the normal channels of collective bargaining" in an attempt "to dissuade employees from supporting the union and create incentives for them to abandon their support for the union"

  8. MFP Fire Protection, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    101 F.3d 1341 (10th Cir. 1996)   Cited 6 times
    In MFP Fire Protection, the Court found that the series of agreements, together with the history of payments to the funds, barred the employer from later denying the Union's status as the employees' representative.

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Oklahoma Installation Co.

    219 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 2 times
    Concluding that the contract language at issue did not clearly express the parties' intent, without addressing actual employee support

  10. Section 159 - Representatives and elections

    29 U.S.C. § 159   Cited 2,433 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it

  11. Section 504 - Costs and fees of parties

    5 U.S.C. § 504   Cited 653 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing payment of attorney's fees by the Government when a party prevails in a federal agency adjudication