M. J. Santulli Mail Services, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Strong
393 U.S. 357 (1969) Cited 115 times
Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"
Peerless Roofing Co., Ltd. v. N.L.R.B
641 F.2d 734 (9th Cir. 1981) Cited 42 times
Holding that the requirements of § 302(c) were satisfied when contributions were made pursuant to expired collective bargaining agreements
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dinion Coil Co.
201 F.2d 484 (2d Cir. 1952) Cited 96 times
Observing that "methods of evaluating the credibility of oral testimony do not lend themselves to formulations in terms of rules"
American Distributing Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B
715 F.2d 446 (9th Cir. 1983) Cited 28 times
Applying same principle
Jensen v. Ray Kim Ford, Inc.
920 F.2d 3 (7th Cir. 1990) Cited 13 times
Holding that a "contract is a nullity and does not bind" the plaintiffs because "a forged note is by the common law absolutely void, unless it has in some way been ratified by the payor"
N.L.R.B. v. Central Power Light Company
425 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1970) Cited 30 times 1 Legal Analyses
In NLRB v. Central Pwr. Light Co., 425 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1970), the original charge alleged a discriminatory discharge of an employee and stated the company had violated section 7 rights "by other acts and conduct."
N.L.R.B. v. Louisiana Manufacturing Company
374 F.2d 696 (8th Cir. 1967) Cited 32 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Louisiana Manufacturing Company, 374 F.2d 696, 701-703 (8th Cir. 1967), this court was faced with the question of whether similar statements could be construed as being threats of economic reprisal.
N.L.R.B. v. Chauffeurs, Teamsters Helpers
274 F.2d 19 (7th Cir. 1960) Cited 8 times
No. 12654. January 5, 1960. Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, Margaret M. Farmer, Atty. N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Ross M. Madden, N.L.R.B., Chicago, Ill., Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Frederick U. Reel, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. David Leo Uelmen, David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., for respondents, Goldberg, Previant Cooper, Milwaukee, Wis., of counsel. Before SCHNACKENBERG, KNOCH and CASTLE, Circuit Judges. KNOCH, Circuit
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Raymond Pearson
243 F.2d 456 (5th Cir. 1957) Cited 9 times
No. 16162. April 2, 1957. Morris A. Solomon, Trial Atty. NLRB, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, NLRB, Washington. D.C., Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., Frederick U. Reel, for National Labor Relations Board. Leroy Jeffers, Houston, Tex., Vinson, Elkins, Weems, Searls, Houston, Tex., of counsel, for respondent. Before RIVES, TUTTLE and BROWN, Circuit Judges. RIVES, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board petitions this Court for enforcement of its decision

M. J. Santulli Mail Services, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"

Holding that the requirements of § 302(c) were satisfied when contributions were made pursuant to expired collective bargaining agreements

Observing that "methods of evaluating the credibility of oral testimony do not lend themselves to formulations in terms of rules"

Applying same principle

Holding that a "contract is a nullity and does not bind" the plaintiffs because "a forged note is by the common law absolutely void, unless it has in some way been ratified by the payor"

In NLRB v. Central Pwr. Light Co., 425 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1970), the original charge alleged a discriminatory discharge of an employee and stated the company had violated section 7 rights "by other acts and conduct."

In N.L.R.B. v. Louisiana Manufacturing Company, 374 F.2d 696, 701-703 (8th Cir. 1967), this court was faced with the question of whether similar statements could be construed as being threats of economic reprisal.