Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google
Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google
Blog Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Wyatt Food Stores (division of Kroger Company), Petitioner, v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. - 287 F.2d 37
February 28, 1961
J. Mack Swigert, Cincinnati, Ohio, Johnson, Bromberg, Leeds & Riggs, Dallas, Tex., for petitioner.
Vivian A. Asplund, Atty., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, Atty., N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge, and CLAYTON, District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
This is an ordinary Labor Board case involving only a cease and desist order and no order for reinstatement. A reading of the intermediate report and the decision of the Board leaves us in no doubt that the Board's order should be enforced. This is not a case, as petitioner seems to think, where the Board's order interferes with the right of the petitioner to free speech with respect to unions and unionization. It is, on the contrary, a case where, considering the circumstances under which the matters complained of occurred, including the fact that a campaign for unionization was going on, there is ample basis for the Board's finding that what was said and done was a violation of the act.
It will serve no useful purpose for us to discuss the legal principles involved. They are well and clearly established. It will suffice to say that we find ourselves in substantial agreement with the conclusion and decision of the Board and its order should be, and is hereby,
Enforced.