Fedco Freightlines, Inc. And Kty Leasing Co., Inc.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 657 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."
  2. Golden State Bottling Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    414 U.S. 168 (1973)   Cited 501 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Rule 65(d) allows enforcement of orders against successors of enjoined parties
  3. Radio Union v. Broadcast Serv

    380 U.S. 255 (1965)   Cited 327 times
    Holding that two entities were a single employer and therefore that their gross receipts could be totaled together to establish jurisdiction under the National Labor Relations Act
  4. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc.

    691 F.2d 1117 (3d Cir. 1982)   Cited 341 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that joint employer situation exists only when "two or more employers exert significant control over the same employees . . . [where] they share or co-determine those matters governing essential terms and conditions of employment"
  6. N.L.R.B. v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Topeka

    613 F.2d 267 (10th Cir. 1980)   Cited 16 times
    In Pepsi-Cola, the General Counsel charged an employer with refusing to reinstate unfair labor practice strikers after they made an unconditional offer to return to work.
  7. Golden State Bottling Company v. N.L.R.B

    467 F.2d 164 (9th Cir. 1972)   Cited 6 times
    In Golden State Bottling Co. v. NLRB, 467 F.2d 164 (9th Cir. 1973), the Ninth Circuit cites Bell to uphold a Board order that an employee who was wrongfully discharged be reinstated in his former position although corporate restructuring had turned that position into a supervisory one.