National Labor Relations Board v. Douglas Silk Products Co.

Fifth Circuit

National Labor Relations Board v. Douglas Silk Products Co.

156 F.2d 115, 18 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2119, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3039

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1946

DocketNo. 11567

StatusPublished

This text of 156 F.2d 115 (National Labor Relations Board v. Douglas Silk Products Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

National Labor Relations Board v. Douglas Silk Products Co., 156 F.2d 115, 18 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2119, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3039 (5th Cir. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on in due course for hearing on May 14, 1946, on the petition for enforcement, the answer, and the record made before the Board. The petitioner appeared in person and by brief. The respondent appeared asking additional time for the filing of its brief, time was granted it until June 1st for filing, and the consideration of the cause was deferred until that time. Thereafter, no brief having been filed, and the case being considered on the petition and answer, the record and brief of petitioner, it appeared without question or dispute: (1) that the Board’s findings that respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(1) (2) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(1, 2, 5), are supported by substantial evidence; and (2) that its order is proper and valid and should be enforced. We, therefore, so find, and a decree enforcing its order may be presented for entry.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on in due course for hearing on May 14, 1946, on the petition for enforcement, the answer, and the record made before the Board. The petitioner appeared in person and by brief. The respondent appeared asking additional time for the filing of its brief, time was granted it until June 1st for filing, and the consideration of the cause was deferred until that time. Thereafter, no brief having been filed, and the case being considered on the petition and answer, the record and brief of petitioner, it appeared without question or dispute: (1) that the Board’s findings that respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(1) (2) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(1, 2, 5), are supported by substantial evidence; and (2) that its order is proper and valid and should be enforced. We, therefore, so find, and a decree enforcing its order may be presented for entry.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 F.2d 115, 18 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2119, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-douglas-silk-products-co-ca5-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack