Thesis Painting, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

Fourth Circuit

Thesis Painting, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

684 F. App'x 321

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 7, 2017

Docket16-1871, 16-2031

StatusUnpublished

This text of 684 F. App'x 321 (Thesis Painting, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board) 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

Thesis Painting, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 684 F. App'x 321 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

No. 16-1871 petition for review denied; No. 16-2031 cross-application for enforcement granted by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Thesis Painting, Inc. (Thesis) petitions for review of a National Labor Relations Board (Board) order granting summary judgment on its complaint alleging Thesis violated the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169 (2012) (NLRA), when it refused to recognize and bargain with the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO, District Council 51 (Union) after the Board certified the Union as the representative of Thesis’ employees. The Board’s order directed Thesis to bargain with the Union upon request. The Board has cross-petitioned, asking this court to enforce its order.

We conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s factual findings, and find that the Board’s legal interpretations of the NLRA are rational and consistent with the Act. See 29 U.S.C. § 160(e) (2012); NLRB v. Air Contact Transp. Inc., 403 F.3d 206, 210 (4th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, we deny Thesis’ petition and grant the Board’s cross-petition for enforcement. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

16-1871 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED; 16-2081 CROSS-APPLICATION FOR ENFORCEMENT GRANTED

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

No. 16-1871 petition for review denied; No. 16-2031 cross-application for enforcement granted by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Thesis Painting, Inc. (Thesis) petitions for review of a National Labor Relations Board (Board) order granting summary judgment on its complaint alleging Thesis violated the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169 (2012) (NLRA), when it refused to recognize and bargain with the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO, District Council 51 (Union) after the Board certified the Union as the representative of Thesis’ employees. The Board’s order directed Thesis to bargain with the Union upon request. The Board has cross-petitioned, asking this court to enforce its order.

We conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s factual findings, and find that the Board’s legal interpretations of the NLRA are rational and consistent with the Act. See 29 U.S.C. § 160(e) (2012); NLRB v. Air Contact Transp. Inc., 403 F.3d 206, 210 (4th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, we deny Thesis’ petition and grant the Board’s cross-petition for enforcement. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

16-1871 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED; 16-2081 CROSS-APPLICATION FOR ENFORCEMENT GRANTED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

684 F. App'x 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thesis-painting-inc-v-national-labor-relations-board-ca4-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack