Fotomat Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

Sixth Circuit

Fotomat Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

573 F.2d 959, 100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2027, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11716

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedApril 12, 1978

DocketNo. 76-2319

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 573 F.2d 959 (Fotomat Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fotomat Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 573 F.2d 959, 100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2027, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11716 (6th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant instituted this action in the district court to require disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by the National Labor Relations Board. The information sought included, inter alia, the names and addresses of all witnesses interviewed by the Board in the course of its investigation of appellant’s objections to a certification election and copies of the statements obtained from such witnesses. The district court entered an order granting summary judgment to the defendant-appellee, and the present appeal was taken from that order. The cause has been submitted on the record on appeal and on the briefs and oral arguments of counsel for the parties.

Being fully advised in the premises, the Court concludes that the judgment of the district court should be and it hereby is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the opinion of this Court in NLRB v. Hardeman Garment Corp., 557 F.2d 559 (6th Cir. 1977). See also, Baptist Memorial Hospital v. NLRB, 568 F.2d 1 (6th Cir. 1977); New England Medical Center Hospital v. NLRB, 548 F.2d 377 (1st Cir. 1976).

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

ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant instituted this action in the district court to require disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by the National Labor Relations Board. The information sought included, inter alia, the names and addresses of all witnesses interviewed by the Board in the course of its investigation of appellant’s objections to a certification election and copies of the statements obtained from such witnesses. The district court entered an order granting summary judgment to the defendant-appellee, and the present appeal was taken from that order. The cause has been submitted on the record on appeal and on the briefs and oral arguments of counsel for the parties.

Being fully advised in the premises, the Court concludes that the judgment of the district court should be and it hereby is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the opinion of this Court in NLRB v. Hardeman Garment Corp., 557 F.2d 559 (6th Cir. 1977). See also, Baptist Memorial Hospital v. NLRB, 568 F.2d 1 (6th Cir. 1977); New England Medical Center Hospital v. NLRB, 548 F.2d 377 (1st Cir. 1976).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

573 F.2d 959, 100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2027, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fotomat-corp-v-national-labor-relations-board-ca6-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack