green
Positive treatment
5.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 17 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
American Home Assurance Co. v. Pacific Indemnity Co.
Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848, 850 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 *498 (1981).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Western Casualty & Surety Company v. Citizens Bank of Las Cruces and Bank of New Mexico
Western Casualty “cannot rest on mere allegations .. . but must, by affirmative response in affidavits or otherwise, set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848, 851 (10th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.ct. 2316, 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. Katz's Delicatessen Of Houston Street, Inc.
See Sahara-Tahoe Corp. v. NLRB, 648 F.2d 553 , 556 n. 4 (9th Cir.1980) (explaining contract-bar doctrine and "open period" under NLRB law), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981); NLRB v. Bayliss Trucking Corp., 432 F.2d 1025 , 1027 n. 3 (2d Cir.1970) (same) 4 Pursuant to the NLRB's decision in Louisiana Dock Co., 297 N.L.R.B. 439 (1989), the ALJ ordered reimbursement of dues and fees only for those Katz's employees who were required to join Local 131 by virtue of the union security clause in the collective bargaining agreement 5 The Board did, however, refuse to a…
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. Katz's Delicatessen of Houston Street, Inc.
See Sahara-Tahoe Corp. v. NLRB, 648 F.2d 553 , 556 n. 4 (9th Cir.1980) (explaining contract-bar doctrine and "open period” under NLRB law), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981); NLRB v. Bayliss Trucking Corp., 432 F.2d 1025 , 1027 n. 3 (2d Cir.1970) (same). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Missouri v. United States
See South Dakota v. Adams, 506 F.Supp. 50, 58 (finding that statute was not coercive in light of the fact that the State had not enacted the legislation desired by Congress), aff'd sub. nom South Dakota v. Goldschmidt, 635 F.2d 698 (8th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
State of Mo. v. United States
See South Dakota v. Adams, 506 F.Supp. 50, 58 (finding that statute was not coercive in light of the fact that the State had not enacted the legislation desired by Congress), aff'd sub. nom South Dakota v. Goldschmidt, 635 F.2d 698 (8th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Checkpoint Systems, Inc. v. United States International Trade Commission
See Shindelar v. Holdeman, 628 F.2d 1337, 1343 , 207 USPQ 112, 117 (CCPA 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Checkpoint Systems, Inc. v. The United States International Trade Commission
See Shindelar v. Holdeman, 628 F.2d 1337, 1343 , 207 USPQ 112, 117 (CCPA 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Matthew Cobb, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Saturn Land Company, Inc., Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant
See Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848, 854 (10th Cir.1980) (quoting Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 762 , 100 S.Ct. 2455, 2462 , 65 L.Ed.2d 488 (1980)), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Levy v. City of Cherry Hills Village
See Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848, 853-54 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981); Scheriff v. Beck, 452 F.Supp. 1254 (D.Colo.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Redmond v. Carter
(2×)
Co. v. Fachman, 255 Iowa 989, 998 , 125 N.W.2d 210, 215 (1963); see Chastleton Corp. v. Sinclair, 264 U.S. 543 , 44 S.Ct. 405 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1924); Vigeant v. Postal Telegraph Cable Co., 260 Mass. 335 , 157 N.E. 651 (1927).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Goichman v. City of Aspen
See also Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Goichman v. City of Aspen
See also Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
National Labor Relations Board v. Auto Fast Freight, Inc.
See also Clear Pine Mouldings, Inc. v. NLRB, 632 F.2d 721, 729 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
H.B. Fuller Co. v. National Starch & Chemical Corp.
See, e.g., Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848, 851 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2316 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981); Charbonnages de France v. Smith, 597 F.2d 406, 414 (4th Cir.1979); Sterling Nat’l Bank & Trust Co. of N.Y. v. Fidelity Mortgage Investors, 510 F.2d 870, 875 (2d Cir.1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
National Labor Relations Board v. Complas Industries, Inc.
Compare Clear Pine Mouldings, Inc. v. NLRB, 632 F.2d 721, 728 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 984 , 101 S.Ct. 2317 , 68 L.Ed.2d 841 (1981) (ALJ adjourned the hearings for six weeks to enable the company to meet the new allegation; the company had an opportunity to prepare its defense, and the issue was fully litigated). *735 IY If the conversation between respondent’s vice-president and the employee does not constitute an unfair labor practice even without presentation of respondent’s evidence, then it becomes unnecessary for us to remand for the purpose of providing the respondent …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Prochaska
v.
Marcoux
v.
Marcoux
No. 80-1333.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 18, 1981.
Published
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.