National Labor Relations Board v. Elizabeth Arden, Inc.

Second Circuit

National Labor Relations Board v. Elizabeth Arden, Inc.

139 F.2d 488, 13 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 712, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2319

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedDecember 20, 1943

DocketNo. 146

StatusPublished

This text of 139 F.2d 488 (National Labor Relations Board v. Elizabeth Arden, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second 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. Elizabeth Arden, Inc., 139 F.2d 488, 13 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 712, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2319 (2d Cir. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petition by National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order directing the respondent to cease and desist from certain unfair labor practices and to take certain affirmative action. The only question before us is whether the evidence supports the Board’s finding that Arden did not disestablish the “Association”, which was admittedly a company dominated union, but continued it in existence under the name of the “Independent”. Without reciting the evidence, it will suffice to say that the Board’s finding is supportable. See National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., 2 Cir., Nov. 1, 1943, 138 F.2d 885. Paragraph 2(c) of the order is modified by adding the following suffix: “but the employees are free to organize any union they choose, whether or not it is affiliated with a national union.” See Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 2 Cir., 112 F.2d 657, 661; National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., supra. As thus modified the order is affirmed and enforcement granted.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petition by National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order directing the respondent to cease and desist from certain unfair labor practices and to take certain affirmative action. The only question before us is whether the evidence supports the Board’s finding that Arden did not disestablish the “Association”, which was admittedly a company dominated union, but continued it in existence under the name of the “Independent”. Without reciting the evidence, it will suffice to say that the Board’s finding is supportable. See National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., 2 Cir., Nov. 1, 1943, 138 F.2d 885. Paragraph 2(c) of the order is modified by adding the following suffix: “but the employees are free to organize any union they choose, whether or not it is affiliated with a national union.” See Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 2 Cir., 112 F.2d 657, 661; National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., supra. As thus modified the order is affirmed and enforcement granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 F.2d 488, 13 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 712, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-elizabeth-arden-inc-ca2-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack