Legal Opinion
Klein v. Herrick
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 17, 1941PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RIFKIND, District Judge.
The defendant, Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board, has been ordered to show cause why an injunction should not issue, pendente lite, restraining the defendant “from carrying into effect or taking any proceedings under the Decision and Direction of Election of the National Labor Relations Board, dated August 8, 1941 * * * and from in any manner conducting any investigation or inquiry or determination or election among the production employees of Presto Recording Corp. during the term of the collective labor agreement between plaintiff Union and said…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Rochester Telephone Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- American Federation of Labor v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Shields v. Utah Idaho Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- National Labor Relations Board v. Falk Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Lumber & Sawmill Workers v. MillisSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Inland Empire District Council, Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, Lewiston, Idaho v. MillisSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Fitzgerald v. DoudsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Madden v. Brotherhood & Union of Transit Employees of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1945
- Worthington Pump and MacHinery Corp. v. DoudsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1951
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.