Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States Can Company v. National Labor Relations Board, United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Clc, Intervening

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided January 28, 1993No. 92-1401 and 92-1714Published

1ConcurrenceCudahy, Circuit Judge

the judgment.

I agree with the majority that this case represents the archetypical stock transfer situation and that U.S. Can would likely be bound to the master labor agreement on that basis had the Board addressed the issue. See Esmark, Inc. v. NLRB, 887 F.2d 739, 751 (7th Cir.1989). The fact of the matter is, however, that the Board did not pursue this rather simple theory, but instead followed a complex and questionable analysis to the effect that U.S. Can adopted the master labor agreement by its subsequent conduct despite its repeated and vehement statements and actions to the contrary.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Litton Financial Printing Div., Litton Business Systems, Inc. v. NLRBSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. National Labor Relations Board v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. H. K. Porter Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Esmark, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Afl-Cio, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API