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.
FALCON COAL COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, 1975 — 527 F.2d 570 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
FALCON COAL COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent
527 F.2d 570·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·1975
Before EDWARDS, CELEBREZZE and ENGEL, Circuit Judges.
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
FALCON COAL COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.
No. 75-1162.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Dec. 22, 1975.
Edgar A. Zingman, S. G. Snyder, Wyatt, Grafton & Sloss, Louisville, Ky., for appellant.
Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Abigail Cooley, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Charles A. Shaw, N.L.R.B. Washington, D.C., for appellee.
Before EDWARDS, CELEBREZZE and ENGEL, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY]
ORDER
On receipt and consideration of briefs and records in the above-styled case wherein petitioner, Falcon Coal Company, Inc., seeks a review of a settlement agreement between the Board and the United Mine Workers Union under which the Board had vacated its decision and direction of election and granted the withdrawal of the election petition in this case, with prejudice to the filing of a new petition for a period of six months; and
Finding from our review of the entire record that the Board’s dismissal of the election petition referred to above represented a determination in effect, if not in so much language, that the membership cards upon which the election petition had been based had been solicited in violation of the doctrine of National Labor Relations Board v. Savair Manufacturing Co., 414 U.S. 270, 94 S.Ct. 495, 38 L.Ed.2d 495 (1973), and that no litigable issue remains in relation to this dispute.
The instant petition for review is dismissed on grounds of mootness.