UPMC and its Subsidiaries UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside and Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Single Empl

20 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning
573 U.S. 513 (2014) Cited 273 times 150 Legal Analyses
Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”
Hudgens v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
424 U.S. 507 (1976) Cited 543 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"
Linn v. Plant Guard Workers
383 U.S. 53 (1966) Cited 732 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding as preempted all defamation actions in labor disputes except those published with actual malice
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Riley
199 F.R.D. 276 (N.D. Ill. 2001) Cited 518 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that a party may not respond to allegations about the contents of a document by representing that the "document speaks for itself"
Beth Israel Hospital v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 483 (1978) Cited 220 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time
Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 556 (1978) Cited 196 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board
324 U.S. 793 (1945) Cited 495 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."
Labor Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
Central Hardware Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
407 U.S. 539 (1972) Cited 142 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot
Lane v. Page
272 F.R.D. 581 (D.N.M. 2011) Cited 114 times
Holding that the affirmative defense, if substantively similar to that stated in Form 30, is adequately pled, and that a detailed explanation of the defense can be later presented in a Rule 12(b) motion

UPMC and its Subsidiaries UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside and Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Single Empl

20 Cited authorities

Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”

Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"

Holding as preempted all defamation actions in labor disputes except those published with actual malice

Finding that a party may not respond to allegations about the contents of a document by representing that the "document speaks for itself"

Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time

Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot

Holding that the affirmative defense, if substantively similar to that stated in Form 30, is adequately pled, and that a detailed explanation of the defense can be later presented in a Rule 12(b) motion