Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

National Labor Relations Board v. Blue Ridge Shoe Company, 13777_1 (1970)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13777_1 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 13, 1970
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 422 F.2d 1331 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. BLUE RIDGE SHOE COMPANY, Respondent. No. 13777. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued April 7, 1970. Decided April 13, 1970. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. John I. Taylor, Attorney, N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Eli Nash, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for petition
More

422 F.2d 1331

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,
v.
BLUE RIDGE SHOE COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 13777.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued April 7, 1970.

Decided April 13, 1970.

On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board.

John I. Taylor, Attorney, N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Eli Nash, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for petitioner.

John J. Delaney, Jr., Boston, Mass. (Duane R. Batista, and Nutter, McClennen & Fish, Boston, Mass., W. P. Sandridge, Sr., and Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, Winston-Salem, N.C., on the brief), for respondent.

Before BRYAN, CRAVEN and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

We think the facts found by the board are not unsupported by substantial evidence. To those findings the board applied correct principles of law.

2

Affirmed.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer