§

Hillhaven Rehabilitation Center

325 N.L.R.B. 202 (N.L.R.B. 1997)
Hillhaven Rehabilitation Center

8 Cited authorities

  1. Thomas v. Collins

    323 U.S. 516 (1945)   Cited 884 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state may regulate labor unions but "[s]uch regulation ... must not trespass upon the domain set apart for ... free assembly"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc.

    494 U.S. 775 (1990)   Cited 176 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Health Care & Retirement Corp. of America

    511 U.S. 571 (1994)   Cited 96 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Board's test is inconsistent with both the statutory language and th[e] Court's precedents"

  4. Hill v. Florida

    325 U.S. 538 (1945)   Cited 207 times
    Finding that the filing requirement "in and of itself" does not conflict with the NLRA

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Williams Enterprises, Inc.

    50 F.3d 1280 (4th Cir. 1995)   Cited 23 times
    Upholding finding of causation where four months passed between company's anti-union statements and decertification petition

  6. Hotel, Motel Restaurant Employees v. N.L.R.B

    785 F.2d 796 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 13 times

    No. 85-7106. Argued and Submitted November 13, 1985. Decided March 25, 1986. David Rosenfeld, William A. Sokol. Van Bourg, Weinberg, Roger Rosenfeld, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioners. William Stewart, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Susan Ardissan, M. Armon Cooper, Lukens, St. Peter Cooper, San Francisco, Cal., for intervenor-respondent. Burger Pits, Inc. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board. Before SNEED, KENNEDY and BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges. BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judge.

  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

  8. State v. Smith

    123 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1960)   Cited 1 times

    October 19, 1960. Rehearing Denied November 15, 1960. Appeal from the Criminal Court of Record for Dade County, George E. Schulz, J. Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., B. Clarke Nichols, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Richard E. Gerstein, State Atty., Miami, for appellant. Cowart Dollar, Miami, and Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D.C., for appellee. PER CURIAM. On February 8, 1960, appellee was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record, Dade County, for acting as a business agent of a labor union between