CASINO PAUMA

12 Cited authorities

Mich. v. Bay Mills Indian Cmty.
572 U.S. 782 (2014) Cited 469 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that tribal immunity extends to "suits arising from a tribe’s commercial activities, even when they take place off Indian lands"
San Diego Unions v. Garmon
359 U.S. 236 (1959) Cited 2,563 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the States as well as the federal court must defer to the exclusive competence of the National Labor Relations Board" if "an activity is arguably subject to § 7 or § 8 of the [NLRA]"
Machinists v. Wisconsin Emp. Rel. Comm'n
427 U.S. 132 (1976) Cited 465 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that state law is preempted where it would upset the congressionally defined balance of power between management and labor by regulating activity Congress deliberately left unregulated
Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 556 (1978) Cited 196 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board
324 U.S. 793 (1945) Cited 495 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."
Labor Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
Bethlehem Co. v. State Board
330 U.S. 767 (1947) Cited 255 times
Holding federal nonregulation was not an "administrative concession that the nature of these appellants’ business put" the particular subject matter "beyond reach of federal authority"
San Manuel v. N.L.R.B
475 F.3d 1306 (D.C. Cir. 2007) Cited 18 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that “the Board could reasonably conclude that Congress's decision not to include an express exception for Indian tribes in the NLRA was because no such exception was intended or exists”
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Okun Bros. Shoe Store, Inc.
825 F.2d 102 (6th Cir. 1987) Cited 23 times
In Meehan v. City of Los Angeles, 825 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1988), the Ninth Circuit held that two incidents involving alleged unconstitutional harassment did not support the existence of a custom sufficient to establish municipal liability under Monell.
Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
984 F.2d 556 (1st Cir. 1993) Cited 13 times
Concluding that an employer violated § 8 by threatening to have union organizers who were distributing handbills on public property arrested
Section 2710 - Tribal gaming ordinances
25 U.S.C. § 2710 Cited 699 times 16 Legal Analyses
Providing "[n]et revenues . . . may be used to make per capita payments . . . only if" the tribe has already prepared a plan to meet its government essential services

CASINO PAUMA

12 Cited authorities

Holding that tribal immunity extends to "suits arising from a tribe’s commercial activities, even when they take place off Indian lands"

Holding that "the States as well as the federal court must defer to the exclusive competence of the National Labor Relations Board" if "an activity is arguably subject to § 7 or § 8 of the [NLRA]"

Holding that state law is preempted where it would upset the congressionally defined balance of power between management and labor by regulating activity Congress deliberately left unregulated

Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Holding federal nonregulation was not an "administrative concession that the nature of these appellants’ business put" the particular subject matter "beyond reach of federal authority"

Holding that “the Board could reasonably conclude that Congress's decision not to include an express exception for Indian tribes in the NLRA was because no such exception was intended or exists”

In Meehan v. City of Los Angeles, 825 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1988), the Ninth Circuit held that two incidents involving alleged unconstitutional harassment did not support the existence of a custom sufficient to establish municipal liability under Monell.

Concluding that an employer violated § 8 by threatening to have union organizers who were distributing handbills on public property arrested

Providing "[n]et revenues . . . may be used to make per capita payments . . . only if" the tribe has already prepared a plan to meet its government essential services