1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 766 F.2d
  5. 766 F.2d 812 (1985)
 

ALLBRITTON COMMUNICATIONS CO. v. N.L.R.B.

Nos. 84-3438, 84-3620 and 84-3676.

766 F.2d 812 (1985)

ALLBRITTON COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, the News Printing Company, Inc. and the Hudson Dispatch, Petitioners, No. 84-3438, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, Newark Typographical Union No. 103, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, Intervenor. ALLBRITTON COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, the News Printing Company, Inc. and the Hudson Dispatch, Respondents, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, No. 84-3620, Newark Typographical Union No. 103, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, Intervenor. NEWARK TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 103, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner, No. 84-3676, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, Allbritton Communications Company, the News Printing Company, Inc. and the Hudson Dispatch, Intervenors.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided July 8, 1985.

Rehearing and Rehearing Denied September 3, 1985.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Frank C. Sabatino, Schnader, Harrison, Segan and Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa.; Richard W. Beckler (argued), Carl W. Vogt, David M. Foster, Stephen M. McNabb, Fulbright & Jaworski, Washington, D.C., for petitioners in No. 84-3438.

Rosemary M. Collyer, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Elinor Hadley Stillman, Jerrold Jay Wohlgemuth (argued), N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner in No. 84-3620.

Sally M. Armstrong, Brian A. Powers (argued), O'Donoghue and O'Donoghue, Washington, D.C., Jack Wysoker, Mandel, Wysoker, Sherman, Glassner & Weingartner, New Brunswick, N.J., for petitioners in No. 84-3676.

Before ALDISERT, Chief Judge, GIBBONS, Circuit Judge, and DIAMOND, District Judge.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied September 3, 1985.

OPINION OF THE COURT

ALDISERT, Chief Judge.

This review of a decision of the National Labor Relations Board requires us to examine contentions raised in separate petitions for review presented by an employer and a union, and the justification for the Board's action contained in the Board's application for an enforcement order. We must decide whether substantial evidence supports the Board...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases