Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Victor Otlans Roofing Co., 445 F.2d 299 (9th Cir. 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Victor Otlans Roofing Co., 445 F.2d 299 (9th Cir. 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: National Labor Relations Board v. Adams Delivery Service, Inc. (ca9, 1980-07-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) National Labor Relations Board v. Adams Delivery Service, Inc.
9th Cir. · 1980 · confidence medium
Little, Inc., 493 F.2d 1245 (9th Cir. 1974); Inter-Polymer Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 480 F.2d 631, 633 (9th Cir. 1973); N.L.R.B. v. Victor Otlans Roofing Co., 445 F.2d 299, 300 (9th Cir. 1971); N.L.R.B. v. Tom Johnson, Inc., 378 F.2d 342 (9th Cir. 1967); Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 362 F.2d 466, 470 (9th Cir. 1966).
cited Cited as authority (rule) National Labor Relations Board v. Fort Vancouver Plywood Company, Fort Vancouver Plywood Company v. National Labor Relations Board
9th Cir. · 1979 · confidence medium
NLRB v. Victor Otlans Roofing Co., 445 F.2d 299, 300 (9th Cir. 1971); NLRB v. Seafarers Union, 496 F.2d 1363, 1365 (5th Cir. 1974).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Inter-Polymer Industries, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
9th Cir. · 1973 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e. g., NLRB v. Victor Otlans Roofing Co., 445 F.2d 299, 300 (9th Cir. 1971).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,
v.
VICTOR OTLANS ROOFING CO., Respondent
26196.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jun 23, 1971.
445 F.2d 299
Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., Charles M. Henderson, Director, NLRB, Seattle, Wash., for petitioner., Frederick Richman, Cooper, Wyatt, Tepper & Plant, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Browning, Carter, Per Curiam, Trask.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Larrell Lane, employed as a kettleman by the respondent, Victor Otlans Roofing Co., was discharged. He claimed that the true cause of the discharge was union activity. A charge was filed against the employer before the National Labor Relations Board by Lane’s union to this effect and eventually a hearing held before a Trial Examiner on the issues joined by the Employer’s denial.

The Trial Examiner found in favor of the union and the employee and entered an order for reinstatement and back pay. A review by the Board resulted in an order affirming the Trial Examiner’s findings and order subject to a change in a date which was of no substantial significance.

The case is now before this court upon an application of the National Labor Relations Board pursuant to Section 10(e) of the Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. Section 151 et seq. for enforcement of its order against Otlans [1]

[*300] Otlans was found by the Board to have violated Section 8(a) (3) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Board by discharging Lane because of his union activity and refusing to reinstate him. A violation of Section 8(a) (3) and (1) may be found where an employee is discharged because he has sought with the aid of his union or with other employees to protest the amount of his pay or his working conditions. Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 362 F.2d 466, 468 (9th Cir.1966). That is what Lane did and upon conflicting evidence involving the credibility of witnesses, the Board found against the employer.

We have reviewed the testimony and it is apparent from it that substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole supports the Board’s findings. N.L.R.B. v. Ayer Lar Sanitarium, 436 F.2d 45, 49 (9th Cir.1970).

We also conclude that the Trial Examiner did not abuse his discretion in declining to reopen the hearing to hear evidence that was available at the time of hearing.

The order of the Board is enforced.

1

. The decision of the Board may be found at 182 N.L.R.B. No. 137.