National Labor Relations Board v. Mooresville Mills

Fourth Circuit

National Labor Relations Board v. Mooresville Mills

204 F.2d 87, 32 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2081, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 6, 1953

Docket6557_1

StatusPublished

This text of 204 F.2d 87 (National Labor Relations Board v. Mooresville Mills) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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. Mooresville Mills, 204 F.2d 87, 32 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2081, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634 (4th Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition to enforce an order of the National Labor Relations Board which found respondent guilty of unfair labor practices and ordered it to desist therefrom and to reinstate with back pay three employees, Hawkins, Davis and McGraw, whom it found to have been discriminato-rily discharged because of union membership. The facts are fully set forth in the report of the trial examiner and the decision of the board. We think that the findings and order of the board are sustained by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, except with respect to the discharges of Davis and McGraw. As to these employees, we do not think that.the record as a whole supports the finding that they were discharged for union membership.

The order of the Board will accordingly be modified by eliminating therefrom all provisions relating to Davis and McGraw; and as so modified it will be enforced.

Modified and enforced.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition to enforce an order of the National Labor Relations Board which found respondent guilty of unfair labor practices and ordered it to desist therefrom and to reinstate with back pay three employees, Hawkins, Davis and McGraw, whom it found to have been discriminato-rily discharged because of union membership. The facts are fully set forth in the report of the trial examiner and the decision of the board. We think that the findings and order of the board are sustained by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, except with respect to the discharges of Davis and McGraw. As to these employees, we do not think that.the record as a whole supports the finding that they were discharged for union membership.

The order of the Board will accordingly be modified by eliminating therefrom all provisions relating to Davis and McGraw; and as so modified it will be enforced.

Modified and enforced.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F.2d 87, 32 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2081, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-mooresville-mills-ca4-1953.