Kit Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board

Ninth Circuit

Kit Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board

365 F.2d 829, 62 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2856, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 5222

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 10, 1966·No. 20604·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER

Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner’s petition for review is denied for the reason that this court is of the opinion that the labor board’s determination that petitioner was guilty of an unfair labor practice (in the context of the facts here) was not clearly erroneous.

This court does not reach the issue of whether the use of a union label can be, in other circumstances, within the ambit of mandatory bargaining of employers and unions.

In the event the respondent advises the court within 60 days from date that petitioner has signed the contract, the subject of this review, the petition for adjudication of civil contempt will be dismissed.

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

OPINION AND ORDER

Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner’s petition for review is denied for the reason that this court is of the opinion that the labor board’s determination that petitioner was guilty of an unfair labor practice (in the context of the facts here) was not clearly erroneous.

This court does not reach the issue of whether the use of a union label can be, in other circumstances, within the ambit of mandatory bargaining of employers and unions.

In the event the respondent advises the court within 60 days from date that petitioner has signed the contract, the subject of this review, the petition for adjudication of civil contempt will be dismissed.

Kit Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board, 365 F.2d 829, 62 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2856, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 5222 (9th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

365 F.2d 829 (Kit Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related