U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1956

National Labor Relations Board v. Tennessee Coach Company

National Labor Relations Board v. Tennessee Coach Company
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided October 30, 1956 · Martin, Miller, Per Curiam, Stewart
237 F.2d 907; 39 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2055; 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4333 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Washington, D. C., Charles M. Ryan, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner., Anderson & Snepp, Knoxville, Tenn., for respondent.

National Labor Relations Board v. Tennessee Coach Company

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board. The only substantive question presented is whether the respondent could lawfully refuse to bargain with a union six weeks after it had been certified as bargaining representative, for the reason that a majority of the employees had signed a petition stating that they were not members of the union, “and we do not want this union, or any other organization to represent us as our collective bargaining agent.”

Despite factual distinctions pointed out by the respondent, we are of the opinion that the Supreme Court’s decision in Brooks v. National Labor Relations Board, 1954, 348 U.S. 96, 75 S.Ct. 176, 99 L.Ed. 125, is dispositive of the question presented. We are also of the opinion that the form and scope of the Board’s order is not improper. See May *908 Department Stores Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 1945, 326 U.S. 376, 392-393, 66 S.Ct. 203, 90 L.Ed. 145; National Labor Relations Board v. Express Publishing Co., 1941, 312 U.S. 426, 438-439, 61 S.Ct. 693, 85 L.Ed. 930.

It is therefore ordered that the order of the National Labor Relations Board be and it hereby is enforced.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.