301 U.S. 142 (1937), 469, Washington, Virginia & Maryland Coach Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
Docket Nº | No. 469 |
Citation | 301 U.S. 142, 57 S.Ct. 648, 81 L.Ed. 965 |
Party Name | Washington, Virginia & Maryland Coach Co. v. National Labor Relations Board |
Case Date | April 12, 1937 |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
Page 142
Argued February 10, 1937
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. A corporation engaged in the business of transporting passengers and express, for hire, between points in the District of Columbia and points in Virginia, held an instrumentality of interstate commerce and subject to provisions of the National Labor Relations Act against discharge of employees because of their membership in a union and their advocacy of collective bargaining. P. 146.
2. The National Labor Relations Act limits the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board to instances within the commerce power, and its orders in excess of its jurisdiction may be challenged by any party aggrieved. P. 146.
3. Claims not made in the petition for certiorari are not open for decision. P. 146.
4. Findings of the National Labor Relations Board upon matters within its jurisdiction will not be reversed or modified unless clearly improper or unsupported by substantial evidence. P. 147.
5. An order of the National Labor Relations Board requiring a common carrier by motor to reinstate in its employment several drivers and garage mechanics found by the Board to have been discharged because of their membership in a union, and to make good the losses of pay due to their discharge, and directing the carrier to post notices of its intention to comply with the Board's order, held valid upon the authority of Labor Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., ante p. 1. P. 147.
85 F.2d 990 affirmed.
Certiorari, 299 U.S. 533, to review a judgment for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board, entered by the court below upon petition of the Board under the National Labor Relations Act.
Page 144
ROBERTS, J., lead opinion
MR. JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.
In this case, the petitioner, an operator of motor busses for the transportation of passengers and express for hire between points in the District of Columbia and in the state of Virginia, challenges the enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act against it as in contravention of the commerce clause and the Fifth and Seventh Amendments of the Constitution.
Pursuant to a written charge filed with the National Labor Relations Board by Local No. 1079 of the Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway, and Motor Coach Employees of America, a labor organization, [57 S.Ct. 649] the Board issued a complaint alleging that the petitioner had discharged and refused to reinstate certain drivers and garage workmen because of their membership and activity in Local No. 1079, and that this constituted engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the intent of § 8, subsections (1) and (3), and § 2, subsections (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.1 The petitioner appeared specially and filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on constitutional grounds, and, without waiving its objections to the
Page 145
Board's jurisdiction, filed an answer substantially admitting the allegations of the complaint with respect to the interstate character of its business, admitting the discharge and refusal to reinstate the employees mentioned in the complaint, and alleging that its action was motivated by the employees' inefficiency, and not affected by their membership or activity in the union. The Board overruled the objections to its jurisdiction, fully heard the case, received evidence offered by both parties, and, at the conclusion of the hearing, denied...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
134 F.2d 633 (D.C. Cir. 1943), 7948, American Gas & Electric Co. v. S.E.C.
...shall be conclusive,' means supported by substantial evidence. Washington, V. & M. Coach Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 1937, 301 U.S. 142, 147, 57 S.Ct. 648, 81 L.Ed. 965. Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind m......
-
Lost fidelities.
...(147.) See Virginian Ry. Co. v. System Fed'n No. 40, 300 U.S. 515, 563 (1937). (148.) See Washington, Va. & Md. Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142, 146 (1937). (149.) See NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1, 76 (1937) (McReynolds, J., dissenting). (150.) Cf. Laura Kalman, ......
-
The jurisprudence of the Hughes Court: the recent literature.
...of application of the National Labor Relations Act to various enterprises. See Washington, Va. & Md. Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142 (1937); Associated Press v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 103 (1937); NLRB v. Friedman-Harry Marks Clothing Co., 301 U.S. 58 (1937); NLRB v. Fruehauf Trailer Co., 301 U.......
-
Court-packing and compromise.
...288 (1936). (65.) Virginian Railway Co. v. Federation, 300 U.S. 515 (1937). (66.) Washington, Virginia, & Maryland Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142 (1937). (67.) Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937). (68.) Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 (1936); United States v. Butler, 297 U.......
-
Baird-Ward Printing Co., Inc., (1954)
...OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDWe are not bound by findings not so supported.Washington,Virginia &Maryland Coach Company v. N. L. R. B.,301 U. S. 142, 57 S. Ct. 648, 81 L. Ed.965;Appalachian Elec. P. Co. v. N. L. R. B.,4 Cir., 93 F. 2d985.Substantialevidence is such relevant evidence as a......
-
Pereira Studio, (1949)
...B. v. Fainblatt,306 U. S. 601;N. L. R. B. v BradfordDyeing A88'n.,310 U. S. 318.8Washington, Virginia & Maryland Coach Co. v. N. L. R. B.,301 U. S. 142;N. L R. B.v.Norfolk Shipbuilding and Drydock Corp.,109 F. (2d) 128 (C. C. A.4) ; SouthernColoradoPower Co. v. N.L. R B,111 F (2d) 539 (C. C......
-
Inter-City Advertising Co. of Greensboro, N.C., Inc., (1950)
...L. R. B.,163 F.2d 22,cert.denied,332 U. S. 773;N. L. R. B. v. Washington, Virginiaand MarylandCoach Co.,85 F. 2d 990(C.A. 4),affirmed301 U. S. 142;The AmericanNational Bank of St. Paul v. N. L. It. B.,144 F.2d 268(C. A. 8) ; N. L. It. B. V. CenturyProjector Corporation,141 F. 2d 488 (C. A. ......
-
Humble Oil & Refining Co., (1939)
...Press v. National Labor Relations Board,301 U. S. 103;Washington,Virginia and Maryland Coach Co. v. National Labor Relations Board,301 U. S. 142;Na-tional Labor Relations Board v. Jones&Laughlin Steel Corp.,301 U. S.1; National LaborRelations Board v. Friedman-Harry Marks Clothing Co.(2 cas......
-
Court-packing and compromise.
...288 (1936). (65.) Virginian Railway Co. v. Federation, 300 U.S. 515 (1937). (66.) Washington, Virginia, & Maryland Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142 (1937). (67.) Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937). (68.) Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 (1936); United States v. Butler, 297 U.......
-
The jurisprudence of the Hughes Court: the recent literature.
...of application of the National Labor Relations Act to various enterprises. See Washington, Va. & Md. Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142 (1937); Associated Press v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 103 (1937); NLRB v. Friedman-Harry Marks Clothing Co., 301 U.S. 58 (1937); NLRB v. Fruehauf Trailer Co., 301 U.......
-
Lost fidelities.
...(147.) See Virginian Ry. Co. v. System Fed'n No. 40, 300 U.S. 515, 563 (1937). (148.) See Washington, Va. & Md. Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142, 146 (1937). (149.) See NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1, 76 (1937) (McReynolds, J., dissenting). (150.) Cf. Laura Kalman, ......
-
The decline of legal classicism and the evolution of New Deal constitutionalism.
...Marks Clothing Co., 301 U.S. 58 (1937); Associated Press v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 103 (1937); Wash., Va. & Md. Coach Co. v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 142 (1937) (all upholding the application of the National Labor Relations Act to intrastate activities of private companies engaged in interstate commerce)......