§

Pratt Corrugated Logistics and Pratt Industries, Inc. Single Employer

360 N.L.R.B. 304 (N.L.R.B. 2014)
Pratt Corrugated Logistics and Pratt Industries, Inc. Single Employer

5 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  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. Sonicraft, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    905 F.2d 146 (7th Cir. 1990)   Cited 19 times
    Applying Redd-I

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Southern Florida Hotel

    751 F.2d 1571 (11th Cir. 1985)   Cited 17 times

    No. 83-5452. February 8, 1985. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate General Counsel, Barbara A. Atkin, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Joseph H. Kaplan, Kaplan, Sicking, Hessen, Sugarman, Rosenthal De Castro, Miami, Fla., for Hotel, Motel, Restaurant Hi-Rise Employees Bartenders Union, Local 355, AFL-CIO. Joel I. Keiler, McLean, Va., for Southern Beau. Finley, Kumble, Wagner, Heine, Underberg Casey, Carl A. Schwarz, Jr., New York City, for Estate of Kaskel, et al. Application for Enforcement

  5. Blankenship and Associates, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    999 F.2d 248 (7th Cir. 1993)   Cited 7 times
    Holding that since consultant based in Indiana rendered services to company based in Pennsylvania, "no more was required to put [the consultant's] activities within interstate commerce" and therefore within the Board's statutory jurisdiction under NLRA § 10 (citing Reliance Fuel Oil Corp., 371 U.S. at 226-27, 83 S.Ct. 312)