Fibreboard Paper Prods. Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 375 U.S. 963 (1964). · Go Syfert
Search
Fibreboard Paper Prods. Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 375 U.S. 963 (1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: International Ladies' Garment Workers Union v. National Labor Relations Board (cadc, 1972-06-08)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." International Ladies' Garment Workers Union v. National Labor Relations Board
D.C. Cir. · 1972 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Fibreboard Paper Products Corp., supra note 19, cert. denied as to dismissal of § 8(a) (3) allegations, 375 U.S. 963 , 84 S.Ct. 490 , 11 L.Ed.2d 413 (1964) ; McGregor Printing Corp., 163 NLRB 938 , 939 (1967) ; Diaper Jean Manufacturing Co., 109 NLRB 1045 , 1058, 1061-1063 (1954), enforced, sub nom.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, McLoughlin Manufacturing Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, Intervenor
D.C. Cir. · 1972 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Fibreboard Paper Products Corp., supra note 19, cert. denied as to dismissal of Sec. 8(a) (3) allegations, 375 U.S. 963 , 84 S.Ct. 490 , 11 L.Ed.2d 413 (1964); McGregor Printing Corp., 163 NLRB 938 , 939 (1967); Diaper Jean Manufacturing Co., 109 NLRB 1045 , 1058, 1061-1063 (1954), enforced, sub nom.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fibreboard Paper Products Corp.
v.
National Labor Relations Board Et Al.
610.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 6, 1964.
375 U.S. 963
Marion B. Plant and Gerard D. Reilly for petitioner. Solicitor General Cox, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for the National Labor Relations Board.
Goldberg.
Published

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted limited to Questions 1 and 3 presented by the petition which read as follows:

“1. Was Petitioner required by the National Labor Relations Act to bargain with a union representing some of its employees about whether to let to an independent contractor for legitimate business reasons the performance of certain operations in which those employees had been engaged?
“3. Was the Board, in a case involving only a refusal to bargain, empowered to order the resumption of operations which had been discontinued for legitimate business reasons and reinstatement with back pay of the individuals formerly employed therein?”
Mr. Justice Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.