U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1970

National Labor Relations Board v. Local 252, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, Afl-Cio

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided July 21, 1970 · Byrne, Duniway, Ely

429 F.2d 1244; 74 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2864; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8064 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Glen M. Bendixsen (argued), Atty. N.L.R.B., Roy 0. Hoffman, Director, N. L.R.B., San Francisco, Cal., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Gen. Counsel for N.L.R.B., Elliott Moore, and Joseph A. Yablonski, Attys., for N.L.R.B., Washington, D. C., for appellant., Victor J. Van Bourg (argued), of Levy, DeRoy, Geffner & Van Bourg, San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

National Labor Relations Board v. Sequoia District Council of Carpenters, Afl-Cio, and John Horn and Larry Null, Additional in Contempt (9th Cir. 1977)
National Labor Relations Board v. United Association of Journeymen (9th Cir. 1987)
National Labor Relations Board v. United Ass'n of Journeymen (9th Cir. 1987)

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

BYRNE, District Judge:

This ease is before the court on the application of the National Labor Relations Board pursuant to Section 10(e) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, for enforcement of its order issued against Local 252, Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association.

The Board found that Local 252, by threatening and ultimately imposing fines and punishment on three of its members, Jessie Blassingame, Harold Crapson, and Rex Napier, for crossing a picket line manned by another union, induced or encouraged its members employed by Comfort Air Conditioning and Supply, Inc. to withhold their services with an object of forcing or requiring Comfort to cease doing business with S. L. Miller, Inc. in violation of Section 8(b) (4) (i) (B) of the Act.

We have examined the record carefully and find that substantial evidence considered as a whole supports the Board’s findings and conclusion.

It is ordered that a judgment be entered enforcing the Board’s order in full.

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