C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER XIV—FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND FEDERAL SERVICE IMPASSES PANEL › SUBCHAPTER C—FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY › PART 2429—MISCELLANEOUS AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Subpart A—Miscellaneous

5 C.F.R. § 2429.8

[Reserved]

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1984–1990 · leading case: Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Afl-Cio, Local 3090 v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 777 F.2d 751 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Afl-Cio, Local 3090 v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 777 F.2d 751 (D.C. Cir. 1985). · cites it 5× “3 How *753 ever, notwithstanding FLRA regulations codified in 5 C.F.R. § 2429.8 which specify that the filing of exceptions does not, by itself, stay an arbitration award, 4 the Home neither requested a stay of the arbitration award nor did it comply with the award.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 593 F. Supp. 1203 (D.D.C. 1984). · cites it 7× “§§ 7105 (a)(2)(H) and (I), 7121, and 7122; and the FLRA’s own regulations, 5 C.F.R. § 2429.8 . FLRA has filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, and plaintiffs have filed a cross-motion for summary judgment.”
Local 1928, Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 630 F. Supp. 947 (D.D.C. 1986). · cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 2429.8 (a) (1985). On the other hand, a timely request for a stay does operate as a “temporary stay,” and it remains in effect “until the [FLRA] issues its decision and order on the exceptions, or the [FLRA] .”
Loc. 1928, Am. Fed. of Gov. Emp. v. Fed. Lab. Rel. Auth., 630 F. Supp. 947 (D.D.C. 1986). · cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 2429.8 (a) (1985). On the other hand, a timely request for a stay does operate as a "temporary stay," and it remains in effect "until the [FLRA] issues its decision and order on the exceptions, or the [FLRA] .”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 741 F. Supp. 980 (D.D.C. 1990). “Accordingly, it is this 24th day of July, 1990 *983 ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment be and it is hereby denied; and it is further ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be and it is hereby granted; and it is further ordered ORDERED that the…”
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.