Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

National Labor Relations Board v. Combined Century Theatres Inc.

August 3, 1960

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER
v.
COMBINED CENTURY THEATRES, INC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.



Before LUMBARD and BARNES, Circuit Judges and SMITH, District Judge.

Per Curiam: Upon the motion of the General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board, our decision of May 2, 1960 is amended so as to grant enforcement to the Board's order of March 11, 1959, as well as to the supplemental order of June 22, 1959, considered in our May 2, 1960 opinion.

Respondents' cross motion that the order of March 11, 1959 be granted enforcement only upon modification is denied. Respondents ask that the Board's order be narrowed in scope so as to exclude from its prohibitions unlawful conduct directed at employers and unions other than those as to which evidence of violations of the National Labor Relations Act was introduced. We need not consider the merits of respondents' contention that the order is too broad in scope, for the order was entered by the Board pursuant to a stipulation between the General Counsel and the respondents; having so stipulated, respondents, of course, took no exception to the order before the Board nor, indeed, did they challenge its propriety upon the original argument before this Court. In the face of the stipulation, and in the absence of any exception to the order taken before the Board or the showing of any extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not consider respondents' objections. NLRB v. District 50 , 355 U.S. 453, 464 (1958).

We do not understand the Supreme Court's recent decision in Communications Workers v. NLRB , 362 U.S. 479 (1960), upon which respondents rely, to express any jurisdictional limitation upon the Board's power, the excess of which we might consider even in the absence of proper exception, but rather to mean only that the evidence before the Board must be such as to justify not only the character but also the breadth of the Board's order. Questions as to the sufficiency of the evidence will, of course, be considered by the Court upon review of the order only if they have been appropriately preserved.

19600803

© 1998 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.