green
Positive treatment
4.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
See Florida Power & Light Co. v. IBEW Local 641, 417 U.S. 790 , 813 n. 23, 94 S.Ct. 2737 , 2749 n. 23, 41 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974) ("[W]hile a union violates [NLRA] Sec. 8(b)(1)(B) by striking to force an employer to agree to hire only union members as foremen, it can propose that supervisors be covered by the collective bargaining agreement.") (internal citation omitted); accord Sakrete of Northern Cal., Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902, 908 (9th Cir.1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965). 8 Thus, when Congress enacted the PRSA in 1972, it had long been the law in the pr…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Department of the Interior v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
See Florida Power & Light Co. v. IBEW Local 64.1, 417 U.S. 790 , 813 n. 23, 94 S.Ct. 2737 , 2749 n. 23, 41 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974) (“[Wjhile a union violates [NLRA] § 8(b)(1)(B) by striking to force an employer to agree to hire only union members as foremen, it can propose that supervisors be covered by the collective bargaining agreement.”) (internal citation omitted); accord Sakrete of Northern Cal., Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902, 908 (9th Cir.1964), cert, denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965). 8 Thus, when Congress enacted the PRSA in 1972, it had long been the law in the…
cited
Cited "see"
Missouri Pacific Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States
See Sakrete of Northern California, Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir.1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jose Manuel Acosta and Roberto Rodriguez
See Lord v. Kelley, 334 F.2d 742, 746 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 650 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. Triumph Curing Center and M. F. Lee D/B/A Lee's Sewing Company, Inc.
(2×)
See Sakrete of Northern California, Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902 , 905 n. 4, (quoting NLRB, 21st Annual Report, 14-15) (9 Cir. 1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
Harding Glass Industries, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Although neither an employer nor union need be bound by the inclusion of persons in a unit who are later proved to be ineligible, see Florida Power & Light Co. v. Electrical Workers, Local 641, 417 U.S. 790 , 813 n.13, 94 S.Ct. 2737, 2743 , 41 L.Ed.2d 477, 486 (1974); accord Sakrete of N. Calif., Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965); Hargis & Sons, Inc., 164 NLRB 1042 (1967), the unit designated in the union’s demand for recognition affords a frame of reference for assessment of the propriety or impropriety of the emplo…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Campbell
See Lord v. Kelley, 334 F.2d 742 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 650 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965). 27 The government's argument that the Internal Revenue Service's investigatory powers under Section 7602 should be interpreted to include the power to compel execution of handwriting exemplars because such power has been granted to grand juries, United States v. Mara, 410 U.S. 19 , 93 S.Ct. 774 , 35 L.Ed.2d 99 (1973); United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1 , 93 S.Ct. 764 , 35 L.Ed.2d 67 (1973), is unconvincing.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Campbell
See Lord v. Kelley, 334 F.2d 742 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 650 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
Abrams v. Occidental Petroleum Corporation
Blau v. Lamb, supra; Blau v. Mission Corp., 212 F.2d 77, 80 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 347 U.S. 1016 , 74 S.Ct. 872 , 98 L.Ed. 1138 (1954); Smolowe v. Delendo Corp., 136 F.2d 231, 235-237 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 320 U.S. 751 , 64 S.Ct. 56 , 88 L.Ed. 446 (1943); Newmark v. RKO General, supra; see, Booth v. Varian Associates, 334 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 681 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965); Marquette Cement Mfg.
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. Hod Carriers' Building & General Laborers' Union of America, Local No. 652, Afl-Cio
See Sakrete of Northern California, Inc., v. N.L.R.B., 332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964), C.D. 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 , rehearing denied, 380 U.S. 926 , 85 S.Ct. 883 , 13 L.Ed.2d 814 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Frankel v. Slotkin
See also Booth v. Varían Associates, 334 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.1964) cert denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 651 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965); Allis-Chalmers Mfg.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sheeran v. American Commercial Lines, Inc.
Compare Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v. NLRB, 652 F.2d 1055, 1075 (1st Cir. 1981) with Royal Typewriter Co. v. NLRB, 533 F.2d 1030 , 1043 (8th Cir. 1976), and Sakrete of Northern Cal., Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902, 905-08 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965). 48 In each of the cases cited in the preceding paragraph, the court found either actual control of labor relations (see Soule and Sakrete ), or the means to exercise control over labor policies coupled with a course of conduct encouraging such belief (see Royal Typewriter ). 49 In S. S. Kresge Co…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sheeran v. American Commercial Lines, Inc.
Compare Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v. NLRB, 652 F.2d 1055, 1075 (1st Cir. 1981) with Royal Typewriter Co. v. NLRB, 533 F.2d 1030 , 1043 (8th Cir. 1976), and Sakrete of Northern Cal., Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902, 905-08 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 649 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In the Matter of the Application of Lafayette Academy, Inc., Appeal of United States of America
(2×)
Compare Lord v. Kelley, 223 F.Supp. 684, 691 (D.Mass.1963), appeal dismissed, 334 F.2d 742 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 650 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,811 Provident Securities Company, a California Corporation v. Foremost-Mckesson, Inc., a Maryland Corporation
See, e. g., *607 Booth v. Varian Associates, 334 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 , 85 S.Ct. 651 , 13 L.Ed.2d 556 (1965).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dandy Products, Inc.
v.
Federal Trade Commission
v.
Federal Trade Commission
No. 549.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 18, 1965.
Charles Rowan for petitioners. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Lionel Kestenbaum and James Mcl. Henderson for respondent.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.