Interstate Circuit v. U.S.

Holding proof of an explicit agreement unnecessary to establish antitrust conspiracy among movie distributors where, "knowing that concerted action was contemplated and invited, the distributors gave their adherence to the scheme and participated in it"

I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assu. Co.

Holding that a fifty-eight-year-old newspaper article describing a contemporaneous fire in the clock tower of a courthouse, which article did not fall under a recognized hearsay exception, was nonetheless admissible where that account was trustworthy, necessary, relevant, and material to the issue of whether lightning caused the tower to collapse

Montana Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission

Concluding that use of the river by “several steamboats” was sufficient to support a navigability finding

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. W.B. Jones Lumber

Holding that "[t]he Board is not required to observe the legal rules of evidence as are common law courts," and thus, "the evidence offered was admissible even though it may have involved hearsay"

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wallick

In N.L.R.B. v. Wallick, 198 F.2d 477 (3 Cir. 1952), that court sustained a Board order requiring a respondent partnership which operated several enterprises engaged in the manufacture of ladies' garments to either reopen a plant which it had closed in violation of the Act because its employees had organized or give its employees an opportunity to work in other plants operated by the partnership.

International, Etc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

In International Association of Machinists v. National Labor Relations Board, 71 App.D.C. 175, 110 F.2d 29, 46, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia makes plain that the decision as to what is an appropriate bargaining unit under the circumstances is a delicate one which has been delegated by Congress to the Board.

Ohio Assoc. Tel. Co. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

Paudler v. Paudler

In Paudler, the Fifth Circuit recognized an individual's right to change domicile for any reason at any time. The jurisdictional inquiry is limited to the fact of relocation and the intended and presumed permanency of that relocation; it does not include consideration of the motivation for making that change.

National Labor Rel. Board v. Ohio Calcium Co.