National Labor Relations Board v. Haddock-Engineers

Good Law
215 F.2d 734·34 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2789·1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3832
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 21, 195414066California1,385 words

Opinion

Opinion

215 F.2d 734 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. HADDOCK-ENGINEERS, Limited, and Associated IV, Joint Venturers and Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons' International Association, AFL, Local Union 797, Respondents. No. 14066. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. September 21, 1954. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer, Alvin Lieberman, Nancy M. Sherman, Attys., NLRB, Washington, D. C., for petitioner. Peart, Baraty & Hassard, Alan L. Bonnington, San Francisco, Cal., John W. Bonner, Bonner & Rittenhouse, Las Vegas, Nevada, for respondent. Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and BONE and ORR, Circuit Judges. DENMAN, Chief Judge. 1 The National Labor Relations Board, hereafter the Board, seeks enforcement of its order against Haddock-Engineers, Limited, hereafter the Company, and Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons' International Association, AFL Local Union 797, hereafter the Union. The Company does not resist the enforcement. 2 The Board's complaint against the Union alleged its jurisdictional requirement that it was engaged in commerce, in paragraph II of its…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.