Woodmere, Inc., and Cross-Appellant v. National Labor Relations Board, And

Ninth Circuit

Woodmere, Inc., and Cross-Appellant v. National Labor Relations Board, And

432 F.2d 559, 75 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2351, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7210

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 25, 1970

Docket24552

StatusPublished

This text of 432 F.2d 559 (Woodmere, Inc., and Cross-Appellant v. National Labor Relations Board, And) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Woodmere, Inc., and Cross-Appellant v. National Labor Relations Board, And, 432 F.2d 559, 75 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2351, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7210 (9th Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Woodmere, Inc., petitions for review of a decision of the National Labor Relations Board, reported at 175 N.L.R.B. No. 69. The Board cross-petitions for enforcement of its order. It adopted the findings of fact and the reasoning of the trial examiner and ordered Wood-mere to cease and desist from violating subsections 8(a) (2) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (2) and (1). Wood-mere had entered into a collective bargaining contract with one union when a question of representation existed because another union was claiming to represent a majority of the employees in the appropriate unit. We have examined the record and the findings of fact of the trial examiner and we conclude, as did the Board, that the findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, and that the trial examiner correctly applied the law.

Woodmere’s petition for review is dismissed. The Board’s petition for enforcement is granted.

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

PER CURIAM:

Woodmere, Inc., petitions for review of a decision of the National Labor Relations Board, reported at 175 N.L.R.B. No. 69. The Board cross-petitions for enforcement of its order. It adopted the findings of fact and the reasoning of the trial examiner and ordered Wood-mere to cease and desist from violating subsections 8(a) (2) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (2) and (1). Wood-mere had entered into a collective bargaining contract with one union when a question of representation existed because another union was claiming to represent a majority of the employees in the appropriate unit. We have examined the record and the findings of fact of the trial examiner and we conclude, as did the Board, that the findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, and that the trial examiner correctly applied the law.

Woodmere’s petition for review is dismissed. The Board’s petition for enforcement is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

432 F.2d 559, 75 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2351, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodmere-inc-and-cross-appellant-v-national-labor-relations-board-and-ca9-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack