Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

337 U.S. 913, 69 S. Ct. 1155, 93 L. Ed. 1724, 1949 U.S. LEXIS 2995

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided May 31, 1949·No. No. 694·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Certiorari granted limited to the question of the construction of § 8 (3) of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 [49 Stat. 449, 29 U. S. C. § 158 (3)] in relation to this' [914]*914case.

Philip S. Ehrlich and Bartley C. Crum for petitioner. Solicitor General Perlman, Robert N. Denham, David P. Findling, Ruth Weyand and Bernard Durum filed a memorandum for the National Labor Relations Board, respondent. Mathew O. Tobriner for the International Chemical Workers Union, A. F. of L., respondent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Certiorari granted limited to the question of the construction of § 8 (3) of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 [49 Stat. 449, 29 U. S. C. § 158 (3)] in relation to this' [914]*914case.

Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 337 U.S. 913, 69 S. Ct. 1155, 93 L. Ed. 1724, 1949 U.S. LEXIS 2995 (1949).

Pincite

337 U.S. 913 (Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

338 U.S. 355 (Supreme Court, 1949)

Opinion

Related