Pacific Custom Materials

14 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 651 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. Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    482 U.S. 27 (1987)   Cited 369 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.

    406 U.S. 272 (1972)   Cited 478 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
  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. Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

    369 U.S. 404 (1962)   Cited 298 times
    Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"
  6. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  7. U.S. Marine Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    944 F.2d 1305 (7th Cir. 1990)   Cited 48 times

    Nos. 89-2051, 89-2140 and 89-2152. Argued December 5, 1989. Decided October 18, 1990. Reheard En Banc June 11, 1991. Decided September 25, 1991. Fred G. Groiss, Quarles Brady, Milwaukee, Wis., James D. Holzhauer (argued), Mayer, Brown Platt, Chicago, Ill., for petitioners/cross-respondents. Kenneth R. Loebel (argued), Previant, Goldberg, Uelman, Gratz, Miller Brueggeman, Milwaukee, Wis., for intervening respondent, petioner. Steven B. Goldstein, Contempt Litigation Branch, Washington, D.C., Fred

  8. Kallmann v. N.L.R.B

    640 F.2d 1094 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 63 times
    Holding that an employer could not be compelled to pay a greater amount of back-pay than the amount the employer would have paid its employees in the absence of the unfair labor practice
  9. Canteen Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    103 F.3d 1355 (7th Cir. 1997)   Cited 18 times
    Affirming NLRB's finding of substantial continuity where there was no temporal break in the operation of the two businesses
  10. New Breed Leasing Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    111 F.3d 1460 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that an ALJ's credibility determinations will be upheld by the court “unless they are ‘inherently incredible or patently unreasonable’ ”
  11. Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,474 times   75 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party