Legal Opinion
Cascade General, Petitioner-Respondent v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent-Petitioner
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 24, 1993No. 91-70547, 91-70605PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TANG, Circuit Judge:
Cascade General (“Cascade”) petitions for review of a decision and order issued by the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”), and the Board cross-petitions for enforcement of its July 5, 1991 order. In its decision and order, the Board held that Cascade violated § 8(a)(1) and (2) of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) and (2), by recognizing OCAW1 as the collective bargaining representative at a time when Cascade did not employ a substantial and representative complement of the work force. The Board also ordered Cascade, among other things,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Premium Foods, Incorporated, and v. National Labor Relations Board, AndCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Intalco Aluminum Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, and International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- National Labor Relations Board v. Pacific Erectors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cascade General, Petitioner-Respondent v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent-PetitionerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Downey v. BreckonDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2020