§

Starrett Brothers and Eken, Inc.

92 N.L.R.B. 1757 (N.L.R.B. 1951)
Starrett Brothers and Eken, Inc.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 504 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

  2. Labor Board v. Mackay Co.

    304 U.S. 333 (1938)   Cited 534 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

  3. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Austin Co.

    165 F.2d 592 (7th Cir. 1947)   Cited 11 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Austin Company, 7 Cir., 165 F.2d 592, 596, it was held that the activity of an employee in initiating a petition to improve working conditions and to propagandize on behalf of a union was protected under the act.

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Entwistle Mfg. Co.

    120 F.2d 532 (4th Cir. 1941)   Cited 15 times

    No. 4770. June 10, 1941. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order against the Entwistle Manufacturing Company. Order modified and enforced. Walter B. Wilbur, of Washington, D.C., Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Laurence A. Knapp, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sylvester Garrett, and William Stix, all of Washington, D.C., Attys