C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER I—NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD › PART 102—RULES AND REGULATIONS, SERIES 8 › Subpart C—Procedure Under Section 10(A) to (I) of the Act for the Prevention of Unfair Labor Practices

29 C.F.R. § 102.29

Intervention; requisites; rulings on motions to intervene

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person desiring to intervene in any proceeding must file a motion in writing or, if made at the hearing, may move orally on the record, stating the grounds upon which such person claims an interest. Prior to the hearing, such a motion must be filed with the Regional Director issuing the complaint; during the hearing, such motion must be made to the Administrative Law Judge. Immediately upon filing a written motion, the moving party must serve a copy on the other parties. The Regional Director will rule upon all such motions filed prior to the hearing, and will serve a copy of the rulings on the other parties, or may refer the motion to the Administrative Law Judge for ruling. The Administrative Law Judge will rule upon all such motions made at the hearing or referred to the Judge by the Regional Director, in the manner set forth in § 102.25. The Regional Director or the Administrative Law Judge, as the case may be, may, by order, permit intervention in person, or by counsel or other representative, to such extent and upon such terms as may be deemed proper.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1982–2019 · leading case: Paul R. Rosen, Esq. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 735 F.2d 564 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Paul R. Rosen, Esq. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 735 F.2d 564 (D.C. Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “Rosen have an effective right to contest Judge Donnelly’s findings, we conclude that he had such a right in the form of a right of intervention in the Board proceedings under 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 (1982). 15 Having failed to exercise the right of intervention, Mr.”
Veritas Health Servs., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 895 F.3d 69 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “Instead, the Board cited only to its generic intervention rule, 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 (2016). Board Order at 1 n.”
Pac. Mar. Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 827 F.3d 1203 (9th Cir. 2016). “”); 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 (“The regional director or the administrative law judge, as the ease may be, may by order permit intervention in person or by counsel or other representative to such extent and upon such terms as he may, deem' proper.”
Leonard Giacalone v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 682 F.2d 427 (3rd Cir. 1982). “§ 160 (b), and the Board Rules, 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 , permit intervention in the proceedings in the discretion of the regional director or the administrative law judge.”
Directsat U.S. LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 925 F.3d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “" 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 . Because neither the Act nor the Board's regulations impose any substantive limits on the Board's discretion, we ask whether the Board exercised its discretion in an arbitrary way and not whether its analysis is consistent with the standards set forth in…”
Am. Crane Corp v. NLRB (4th Cir. 2000). “"); 29 C.F.R. § 102.29 (1998) (detailing the administrative process regarding motions to intervene).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.