Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
TAFT BROADCASTING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, 1975 — 525 F.2d 687 · caselaw · US
General
TAFT BROADCASTING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent
525 F.2d 687·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·1975
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, WEICK, Circuit Judge, and HARVEY, District Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
TAFT BROADCASTING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.
No. 75-1165.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Oct. 6, 1975.
Robert W. Maxwell, II, Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellant.
Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N. L. R. B., Robert A. Giannasi, Washington, D. C., for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, WEICK, Circuit Judge, and HARVEY, District Judge.
Honorable James Harvey, Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
[MAJORITY]
ORDER
This case is before the court upon the petition to review, and the cross-application of the Board to enforce, a decision and order reported at 216 N.L.R.B. No. 10. Reference is made to the decision of the Board for a recitation of pertinent facts.
The court concludes that, under the circumstances of this case, substantial evidence on the record as a whole does not support the conclusion of the Board that Taft Broadcasting Company violated §§ 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act by rescinding its authorization to pay the moving expenses of David Michaels and by failure to reimburse Michaels for such expenses.
It is ordered that the petition for review be granted, that the decision of the Board be set aside, and that enforcement be denied.
Entered by order of the court.