From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kit Manufacturing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 10, 1966
365 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1966)

Opinion

No. 20604.

August 10, 1966.

Weston Weston, Eli Weston, Boise, Idaho, for petitioner.

Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Paul Elkind, Leonard M. Wagman, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.


OPINION AND ORDER


Petitioner's petition for review is denied for the reason that this court is of the opinion that the labor board's determination that petitioner was guilty of an unfair labor practice (in the context of the facts here) was not clearly erroneous.

This court does not reach the issue of whether the use of a union label can be, in other circumstances, within the ambit of mandatory bargaining of employers and unions.

In the event the respondent advises the court within 60 days from date that petitioner has signed the contract, the subject of this review, the petition for adjudication of civil contempt will be dismissed.


Summaries of

Kit Manufacturing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 10, 1966
365 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1966)
Case details for

Kit Manufacturing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

Case Details

Full title:KIT MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 10, 1966

Citations

365 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1966)

Citing Cases

Police Officers Assn v. Detroit

An example of a permissive subject would be a desire by one party to include a union label on all products…

Hall v. Printing Graphic Arts Union

Collective bargaining agreement made and entered this third day of January, 1980 by and between Consolidated…