§

Plasterers, Local 90

236 N.L.R.B. 329 (N.L.R.B. 1978)
Plasterers, Local 90

10 Cited authorities

  1. Rathbun v. United States

    355 U.S. 107 (1957)   Cited 238 times
    Finding no privacy violation, of which the non-consenting party may complain, where a party to the phone conversation consented to another party listening to the phone conversation on an extension

  2. United States v. Keen

    508 F.2d 986 (9th Cir. 1975)   Cited 42 times
    Holding that to be admissible, wiretap evidence must be "obtained in violation of neither the Constitution nor federal law"

  3. Meredith v. Gavin

    446 F.2d 794 (8th Cir. 1971)   Cited 34 times
    Finding that defendants were not liable in a private cause of action because the plaintiff had failed to show that they had violated the federal wiretapping law.

  4. Smith v. Cincinnati Post Times-Star

    475 F.2d 740 (6th Cir. 1973)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that Section 605 is violated only when a person "both intercepts and divulges" the communication

  5. Wood v. Brier

    534 F.2d 330 (7th Cir. 1976)   Cited 27 times

    No. 75-1461. Decided April 2, 1976. DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. E.D.Wis., 66 F.R.D.8.

  6. United States v. Krol

    374 F.2d 776 (7th Cir. 1967)   Cited 26 times
    In Krol, we held that the defendant's conviction would stand where he was found not guilty on the conspiracy part of the indictment but guilty of aiding and abetting the substantive offense.

  7. Smith v. Wunker

    356 F. Supp. 44 (S.D. Ohio 1972)   Cited 18 times
    Examining section 2511(d) exception and noting that "the concern of Congress was with the interception of private conversations by an unseen auditor."

  8. United States v. Martin

    372 F.2d 63 (7th Cir. 1967)   Cited 10 times

    No. 15541. January 23, 1967. Rehearing Denied March 9, 1967. Richard E. Gorman, John Powers Crowley, Chicago, Ill., for appellants. Edward V. Hanrahan, U.S. Atty., Lawrence Jay Weiner, Chicago, Ill., for appellee. John Peter Lulinski, Asst. U.S. Atty., of counsel. Before HASTINGS, Chief Judge, DUFFY, Senior Circuit Judge, and KILEY, Circuit Judge. DUFFY, Senior Circuit Judge. The indictment herein contained four counts. Counts 1 and 2 charged both defendants with the sale and possession of a narcotic

  9. Section 2510 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 2510   Cited 4,297 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"

  10. Section 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

    18 U.S.C. § 2511   Cited 2,831 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”