U.S. Code
»
Title 29
» Chapter CHAPTER 11— LABOR-MANAGEMENT REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE PROCEDURE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— REPORTING BY LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, AND EMPLOYERS
Notes of Decisions
Humphreys, Hutcheson & Moseley v. Donovan, 568 F. Supp. 161 (M.D. Tenn. 1983).
· cites it 15× “This action seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief presents novel and sensitive issues under sections 203(b) and 204, 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b) and § 434 of Title II of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA), 29 U.”
Int'l Union UAW v. Nat'l Right to Work Legal Def. & Educ. Found., Inc., 433 F. Supp. 474 (D.D.C. 1977).
· cites it 5× “The Court also advised the parties, upon reconsideration with respect to Count II of the second amended complaint, that it might have erred in 1973 in holding plaintiffs had an implied private right of action to enforce the reporting requirement of 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b)(1)…”
Douglas v. Wirtz, 232 F. Supp. 348 (M.D.N.C. 1964).
· cites it 19× “…action seeks a declaratory judgment holding erroneous the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b), § 433(c) and § 434 (§ 203(b), § 203(c) and § 204 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959). The plaintiff is a…”
John Edward Price v. W. Willard Wirtz, 412 F.2d 647 (5th Cir. 1969).
· cites it 6× “6 This narrow question involves the construction of § 203(b) and (c) of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C.A. § 433 (b), (c). 7 After full reconsideration of the issues involved, we now reject our earlier position in Part VII of Fowler and adopt the view taken by the Fourth Circuit in Douglas.”
Donovan v. Master Printers Ass'n, 532 F. Supp. 1140 (N.D. Ill. 1981).
· cites it 3× “This case involves a challenge to the Secretary of Labor’s (“Secretary”) interpretation of § 203 of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (“LMRDA” or “Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 433 (1959). The Secretary seeks to compel defendant, Master Printers Association (“Association”)…”
Warshauer v. Solis, 577 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2009).
“” 29 U.S.C. § 433 (a)(1). *1333 Section 203(a)(1)’s reporting requirement applies only to “employers.”
Raymond J. Donovan v. Rose Law Firm, 768 F.2d 964 (8th Cir. 1985).
· cites it 5× “The Department of Labor subsequently contacted the Rose Law Firm and asked the firm to file certain labor consultant reporting forms as required by section 203(b) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) (codified at 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b)). 1 LMRDA *966…”
Int'l Union v. Nat'l Right to Work Legal Def. & Educ. Found., Inc., 366 F. Supp. 46 (D.D.C. 1974).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiffs in addition seek declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the Committee and the Foundation to file with the Secretary of Labor, pursuant to subsection 203(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b)(1), reports containing detailed statements of any agreements or arrangements with…”
United States v. Heinze, 361 F. Supp. 46 (D. Del. 1973).
· cites it 4× “” 29 U.S.C. § 433 (a), referred to in Paragraph 2(a) of Count 1, requires employers to report certain dealings and expenditures to the Secretary of Labor.”
Master Printers Ass'n v. Raymond J. Donovan, 699 F.2d 370 (7th Cir. 1983).
· cites it 2× “The Secretary of Labor initiated this action against Master Printers Association (MPA), alleging that MPA violated section 203 of the Labor Management and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 433 , by failing to file complete reports of its labor relations activity.”
29 U.S.C. § 433(a)(4): 1 case
29 U.S.C. § 433(e): 2 cases
Douglas v. Wirtz, 232 F. Supp. 348 (M.D.N.C. 1964).
“…action seeks a declaratory judgment holding erroneous the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 433 (b), § 433(c) and § 434 (§ 203(b), § 203(c) and § 204 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959). The plaintiff is a…”
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.