Volney Felt Mills, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Tower Co.

    329 U.S. 324 (1946)   Cited 260 times
    Describing the Board's goals for its election rules and regulations
  2. United States v. Wunderlich

    342 U.S. 98 (1951)   Cited 139 times
    Holding that the standard disputes clause in government contracts could bar judicial review of factual issues "absent fraudulent conduct"
  3. United States v. Gleason

    175 U.S. 588 (1900)   Cited 98 times
    In United States v. Gleason, 1900, 175 U.S. 588, 20 S.Ct. 228, 44 L.Ed. 284, the Supreme Court upheld a contract provision giving to the engineer the final and conclusive right to determine the fact of the contractor's conduct as warranting an extension of time beyond that agreed for the completion of the work, but stated the law to be that such finality existed only "in the absence of fraud or of mistake so gross as to necessarily imply bad faith."
  4. Ohio Power Co. v. N.L.R.B

    176 F.2d 385 (6th Cir. 1949)   Cited 64 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plain and unambiguous text must be applied as written without resort to construction
  5. Semi-Steel Casting Co. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    160 F.2d 388 (8th Cir. 1947)   Cited 44 times
    In Semi-Steel Casting Company of St. Louis v. National Labor Relations Board, 160 F.2d 388, 392, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that "* * * the union's loss of majority status, during the course of the proceedings before the Board on the charge of unfair labor practices against the company, if established, does not invalidate the order of the Board."
  6. Kihlberg v. United States

    97 U.S. 398 (1878)   Cited 89 times
    In Kihlberg v. United States, 97 U.S. 398, 24 L.Ed. 1106, the particular element of distance in the carriage of materials was expressly entrusted to the determination of the district chief quartermaster.
  7. Chicago Santa FÉ Railroad v. Price

    138 U.S. 185 (1891)   Cited 45 times
    In R. R. v. Price, 138 U.S. 185, already cited, the Court said: "The mere incompetency or mere neglect of the engineer does not meet the requirements of the case, unless such engineer or inspector made such gross error as to imply bad faith.
  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. General Armature & Mfg. Co.

    192 F.2d 316 (3d Cir. 1951)   Cited 14 times

    No. 10472. Argued October 4, 1951. Filed November 7, 1951. Dominick L. Manoli, Washington, D.C., (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant Gen. Counsel, and Thomas F. Maher, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Marvin C. Wahl, Baltimore, Md. (Blanche Genauer Wahl, Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for respondent. Before McLAUGHLIN, STALEY, and HASTIE, Circuit Judges. HASTIE, Circuit Judge. Two principal contentions are advanced

  9. National Labor Rel. Board v. Capitol G. Lines

    140 F.2d 754 (6th Cir. 1944)   Cited 14 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Capitol Greyhound Lines, 6 Cir., 140 F.2d 754, 759, we said: "The Supreme Court has emphasized more than once the expertness of the National Labor Relations Board in the field of labor controversy; and the Courts of Appeal have been reminded, sometimes sharply, of their curtailed power of review.