National Labor Relations Board v. M & B Contracting Corporation

877 F.2d 62, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 8972
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedJune 21, 1989
Docket18-5753
StatusUnpublished

This text of 877 F.2d 62 (National Labor Relations Board v. M & B Contracting Corporation) 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
National Labor Relations Board v. M & B Contracting Corporation, 877 F.2d 62, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 8972 (6th Cir. 1989).

Opinion

877 F.2d 62

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,
v.
M & B CONTRACTING CORPORATION, Respondent.

No. 89-5399.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 21, 1989.

Before KEITH and WELLFORD, Circuit Judges, and HORACE GILMORE, District Judge.*

ORDER

In NLRB v. M & B Contracting Corp., 653 F.2d 245 (6th Cir.1981) (per curiam), this Court granted enforcement of a Board order finding the respondent violated federal labor law by its discharge of two employees in retaliation for union activities. Subsequently, the Board entered a supplemental order on July 29, 1988, directing the respondent to pay the employees specified amounts for backpay and pension contributions. The Board now petitions for enforcement of its supplemental order.

The Board filed its petition on April 10, 1989. When no response was received from the respondent within 20 days as provided by Rule 15(b), Fed.R.App.P., the Clerk of the Court entered an order directing the respondent to file its response by May 31, 1989, or otherwise show cause why the Court should not enter an order summarily enforcing the Board's order. The respondent has filed nothing in response.

It therefore is ORDERED that the Board's petition for enforcement of its supplemental order of July 29, 1988, is granted in all respects.

*

The Honorable Horace Gilmore, U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
877 F.2d 62, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 8972, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-m-b-contracting-corporation-ca6-1989.