§
Ephraim Haspel

12 Cited authorities

  1. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,658 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

  2. Labor Board v. Link-Belt Co.

    311 U.S. 584 (1941)   Cited 338 times
    Finding a violation of the Act when a supervisor mistakenly believed an employee was involved with the union and discharged him "because of his alleged union activities"

  3. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 316 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  4. Labor Board v. Newport News Co.

    308 U.S. 241 (1939)   Cited 119 times
    Upholding finding of domination where company determined structure of organization and could choose whether to adopt recommendations

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dinion Coil Co.

    201 F.2d 484 (2d Cir. 1952)   Cited 96 times
    Observing that "methods of evaluating the credibility of oral testimony do not lend themselves to formulations in terms of rules"

  6. Indiana Metal Products v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    202 F.2d 613 (7th Cir. 1953)   Cited 48 times

    No. 10717. March 10, 1953. Edward J. Fahy and Shultz Fahy, Rockford, Ill., for petitioner. David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Atty. National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel and Ruth V. Reel, Attys., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before DUFFY, FINNEGAN and LINDLEY, Circuit Judges. DUFFY, Circuit Judge. This is a petition by the Indiana Metal Products Corporation

  7. National Labor Rel. Board v. Thompson Products

    130 F.2d 363 (6th Cir. 1942)   Cited 20 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Thompson Products, 6 Cir., 130 F.2d 363, 368, this court pointed out that "the test, whether a challenged organization is employer controlled, is not an objective one but rather subjective, from the standpoint of employees."

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Metallic Bldg. Co.

    204 F.2d 826 (5th Cir. 1953)   Cited 9 times
    In Metallic Building Co., supra, the Court of Appeals was called on to interpret the term "labor organization" in a suit brought under § 8(a) (3) of the Taft-Hartley Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (3) (1964).

  9. National Labor Rel. Board v. Thompson Products

    162 F.2d 287 (6th Cir. 1947)   Cited 10 times

    No. 10116. June 5, 1947. Petition for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board for the enforcement of its order against Thompson Products, Inc., and Thompson Aircraft Products Company. Order modified in accordance with opinion, and decree directed to issue enforcing order as modified. Harold A. Cranefield, of Washington, D.C. (Gerhard P. Van Arkel, Morris P. Glushien, A. Norman Somers, Ida Klaus, and Fannie M. Boyls, all of Washington

  10. National Labor v. Scientific Nutrition

    180 F.2d 447 (9th Cir. 1950)   Cited 7 times

    No. 11,694. February 24, 1950. David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Attorney, NLRB, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. J. Paul St. Sure and Edward H. Moore, Oakland, Cal., for respondent. Tobriner Lazarus, Mathew O. Tobriner and Stanley Neyhart, San Francisco, Cal., for intervenors. Before MATHEWS, HEALY, and POPE, Circuit Judges. HEALY, Circuit Judge. This case is in certain aspects a companion case to N.L.R.B. v. C.W. Hume