Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

78-1081 (1979)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 78-1081 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 29, 1979
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 590 F.2d 316 100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2689 , 85 Lab.Cas. P 11,158 CONSTRUCTION, BUILDING MATERIALS AND MISCELLANEOUS DRIVERS, LOCAL NO. 83, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. No. 78-1081. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Jan. 29, 1979. Michael J. Keenan, Phoenix, Ariz., for petitioner. Jesse I. Etelson, Atty., Washington, D. C., for respondent. Petition to
More

590 F.2d 316

100 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2689, 85 Lab.Cas. P 11,158

CONSTRUCTION, BUILDING MATERIALS AND MISCELLANEOUS DRIVERS,
LOCAL NO. 83, affiliated with the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of
America, Petitioner,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.

No. 78-1081.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Jan. 29, 1979.

Michael J. Keenan, Phoenix, Ariz., for petitioner.

Jesse I. Etelson, Atty., Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Petition to Review a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board and Cross-Application of the National Labor Relations Board for Enforcement of its Order.

Before ELY, TRASK and HUG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The Decision and Order of the Board is reported at 233 NLRB No. 82.

2

The underlying facts giving rise to the controversy are carefully explored in the decision of Administrative Law Judge Jenson. In our opinion, there was more than ample evidence to support the conclusion that the Union illegally discriminated against its involved member, violating § 8(a)(3) of the Act, and thus engaged in grossly unfair labor practices, as to the involved employee, within the meaning of § 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) and § 2(6) and (7) of the Act. Accordingly, we reject the contentions made by the Union in its Petition to Review and grant the Board's Cross-Application for the enforcement of its Order. The Board's Order will, by this Court, be

3

ENFORCED.

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