Legal Opinion
Miller v. Labor Relations Commission
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided October 14, 1992No. 90-P-1536PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGreenberg, J.
The plaintiffs nine-year campaign contesting his denial of tenure by the Board of Regents of Higher Education (board), illustrates the wisdom of the Labor Relations Commission’s deadline for filing prohibited practice charges. The rule is contained in 456 Code Mass. Regs. § 15.03 (1986), and provides: “Except for good cause shown, no charge shall be entertained by the [cjommission based upon any prohibited practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of a charge with the [commission.”1
In 1986, the plaintiff sought to vacate an adverse 1983 arbitration award by bringing an…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Purity Supreme, Inc. v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Quincy City Hospital v. Labor Relations CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
- Massachusetts State Pharmaceutical Ass'n v. Rate Setting CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- National Labor Relations Board v. Brown & Root, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1953
- National Labor Relations Board v. Pennwoven, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1952
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Massachusetts Association of Cosmetology Schools, Inc. v. Board of Registration in CosmetologyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
- Storlazzi v. BakeyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1995
- RHI Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner of RevenueMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
- Beatty's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2013
- Masterpiece Kitchen & Bath, Inc. v. GordonMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1994