§

Cone-Heiden Corp.

305 N.L.R.B. 1045 (N.L.R.B. 1991)
Cone-Heiden Corp.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Steelworkers v. Warrior Gulf Co.

    363 U.S. 574 (1960)   Cited 5,597 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that grievance machinery “is at the very heart of the system of industrial self-government” and the courts should not deny an order to arbitrate “unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute”

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bildisco & Bildisco

    465 U.S. 513 (1984)   Cited 1,161 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the failure of Congress to draft an exclusion for certain collective bargaining agreements in 11 U.S.C. § 365 indicates that the provision applies to all such agreements, in light of the previous use of such an exclusion by Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 1167

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Amax Coal Co.

    453 U.S. 322 (1981)   Cited 365 times
    Holding that a management-appointed trustee to a multiemployer pension plan could not be considered a management representative

  4. Howard Johnson Co. v. Detroit Local Joint Exec. Bd., Hotel & Rest. Emps. & Bartenders Int'l Union, AFL-CIO

    417 U.S. 249 (1974)   Cited 366 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding under NLRA that purchaser of hotel assets was not required to arbitrate with union about its decision not to hire all of seller’s employees

  5. Shopmen's Loc. U. No. 455 v. Kevin Steel Prod

    519 F.2d 698 (2d Cir. 1975)   Cited 87 times
    In Kevin Steel, the court also addressed the argument, not presented to us, that businesses will enter bankruptcy proceedings to free themselves of labor agreements.

  6. Hinson v. N.L.R.B

    428 F.2d 133 (8th Cir. 1970)   Cited 81 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Section 302 "does not comprehend solely a collective bargaining agreement to the exclusion of any other possible written agreement"

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ware. Union

    283 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1960)   Cited 41 times
    Holding labor union culpable under Taft-Hartley Act for acts performed by its agents, i.e., by union stewards

  8. Virginia Sprinkler Co. v. Local Union 669

    868 F.2d 116 (4th Cir. 1989)   Cited 7 times

    No. 88-3121. Argued January 13, 1989. Decided February 22, 1989. Alexander Neal Barkus (Paul E. Mirengoff, David H. Battaglia, Hunton Williams, Washington, D.C., on brief), for plaintiff-appellant. William Walter Osborne, Jr. (Kathleen A. Murray, Beins, Axelrod Osborne, P.C., Washington, D.C., on brief), for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Before PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges. MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judge. Here we

  9. N.L.R.B. v. SAC CONST. CO., INC

    603 F.2d 1155 (5th Cir. 1979)   Cited 9 times
    In NLRB v. SAC Construction Co., 603 F.2d 1155 (5th Cir. 1979), the employer argued "that, because the contract involved here is a pre-hire agreement, there is no presumption of majority status under the doctrine of Dee Cee Floor Covering, 97 L.R.R.M. 1072, 1073 (1977)."

  10. Bennett-Ireland, Inc. v. American Aluminum Products Co.

    369 P.2d 957 (Wash. 1962)   Cited 3 times

    No. 35990. March 22, 1962. INSOLVENCY — DISTRIBUTION OF INSOLVENT'S ESTATE — PRIORITIES — CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES — LAW APPLICABLE. The trial court in a receivership proceeding erred in applying the priorities of the Federal Bankruptcy Act, pursuant to RCW 23.01.610, so as to give wage claimants priority over a tax claim of the United States, since 31 U.S.C. § 191, which is applicable to nonbankruptcy proceedings, provides that debts due the United States shall be satisfied first, and the relative