§

Gates & Sons Barbeque of Missouri, Inc.

361 N.L.R.B. 563 (N.L.R.B. 2014)
Gates & Sons Barbeque of Missouri, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 650 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 356 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  3. California Gas Tran. v. N.L.R.B

    507 F.3d 847 (5th Cir. 2007)   Cited 9 times
    Acknowledging that terminating employment based on union activity is an unfair labor practice subject to the NLRA

  4. N.L.R.B. v. American Dir. Boring

    383 F. App'x 594 (8th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1 times

    No. 09-1194. Submitted: December 17, 2009. Filed: June 24, 2010. Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Linda Dreeben, Assistant General Counsel, Kellie Isbell, Meredith Jason, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, DC, Ralph P. Tremain, National Labor Relations Board, St. Louis, MO, for Petitioner. Christopher Grant, Schuchat Cook, St. Louis, MO, for Intervenor. Bryan M. Kaemmerer, Michael E. Kaemmerer, McCarthy Leonard, Chester-field, MO, for Respondent

  5. International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, Local Lodge 845 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    265 F. App'x 547 (9th Cir. 2008)

    Nos. 05-77400, 05-77408, 05-77419. Argued and Submitted November 9, 2007. Filed January 24, 2008. David A. Rosenfeld, Esq., Weinberg Roger Rosenfeld, Alameda, CA, for Petitioner. Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board Region, Oakland, CA, Regional Director, San Francisco, CA, Aileen A. Armstrong, Esq., Kathleen Lyon, National Labor Relations Board, Contempt Litigation Compliance Branch, Washington, DC, for Respondent. Joel W. Rice, Esq., Fisher Phillips, LLP, Chicago, IL, for Intervenor

  6. LB B v. N.L.R.B

    232 F. App'x 270 (4th Cir. 2007)

    Nos. 06-1537, 06-1583, 06-1673. Argued: March 13, 2007. Decided: May 11, 2007. On Petitions for Review and Cross-application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. (29-CA-25511; 29-CA-25668; 29-CA-25762; 29-CA-25777; 29-CA-25779). ARGUED: Jennifer McDougal Miller, Wyrick, Robbins, Yates Ponton, Raleigh, North Carolina, for LB B Associates, Incorporated. Philip Adam Hostak, National Labor Relations Board, Office of the General Counsel, Washington, D.C., for the Board. Marty

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second