Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

211 F.2d 235

Docket No. 203.

Docket Docket 22853.

National Labor Relations Board v. Spitzer Motor Sales, Inc.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued March 10, 1954.

Decided March 24, 1954.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1954-03-24

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1957

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on National Labor Relations Board v. Mexia Textile Mills, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aircraft Corp. · National Labor Relations Board v. General Motors Corp.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1954-03-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Melvin Pollack, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C. (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Samuel M. Singer, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.

Arthur Kaplan, New York City, for respondent.

Before CLARK, MEDINA, and HARLAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The objections raised to enforcement of the order of the National Labor Relations Board against this respondent rest entirely upon disputed issues of fact which the Board, making its own findings, 102 N.L.R.B. 437, has resolved in a careful and discriminating manner fully supported by the evidence. The assertions by respondent in oral argument as to some late agreement of adjustment with the complaining union present no issue for us on this proceeding. National Labor Relations Board v. Mexia Textile Mills, 339 U.S. 563, 567-568, 70 S.Ct. 833, 94 L.Ed. 1067; National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aircraft Corp., 2 Cir., 206 F.2d 235, 238; National Labor Relations Board v. General Motors Corp., 2 Cir., 179 F.2d 221, 222.

¶2

An order of enforcement will issue.

/211/f2d/235 · .json · Public domain