Gagnon Plating and Manufacturing Co.
3 Cited authorities
Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.
312 U.S. 426 (1941) Cited 504 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Clausen
188 F.2d 439 (3d Cir. 1951) Cited 23 timesNo. 10374. Argued March 6, 1951. Filed April 2, 1951. Rehearing Denied June 8, 1951. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel (Fannie M. Boyls, and Samuel M. Singer, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for National Labor Relations Board. Irving Herman, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Conrad A. Falvello, Hazelton, Pa., for respondent. Rocco C. Falvello, Hazleton, Pa., on the brief, for respondent-appellee. Before MARIS, McLAUGHLIN
National Lbr. R. Bd. v. George P. Pilling Son
119 F.2d 32 (3d Cir. 1941) Cited 26 timesIn National Labor Relations Board v. George P. Pilling Son Co. (119 F.2d 32) the court said, at page 37: "there must be common willingness among the parties to discuss freely and fully their respective claims and demands and, when these are opposed, to justify them on reason.