National Labor Relations Board v. Deena Artware

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
Citation228 F.2d 871
Docket NumberNo. 11156.,11156.
PartiesNATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. DEENA ARTWARE, Incorporated, Respondent.
Decision Date16 December 1955

228 F.2d 871 (1955)

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,
v.
DEENA ARTWARE, Incorporated, Respondent.

No. 11156.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

December 16, 1955.


228 F.2d 872

Geo. J. Bott, Former General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

James G. Wheeler, Paducah, Ky., for respondent.

Before MARTIN, MILLER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This Court having on July 30, 1952, handed down its decision enforcing an order of the National Labor Relations Board, which directed, among other things, that the respondent, Deena Artware, Incorporated, Paducah, Kentucky, its officers, agents, successors and assigns make whole certain named employees for loss of pay suffered by reason of unlawful discrimination against them; and the Board having then held a further hearing and having issued its Supplemental Decision and Order; and the Board having thereafter moved this Court for the entry of a supplemental decree specifying the amounts of back pay due said employees.

And the Court being of the opinion that jurisdiction to grant said motion and to enter this supplemental decree is conferred by Section 160(e), Title 29 U.S.C.A.; Phelps Dodge Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 313 U.S. 177, 197-200, 61 S. Ct. 845, 85 L.Ed. 1271; N.L.R.B. v. Cambria Clay Products Co., 6 Cir., 215 F.2d 48, 56; Marlin-Rockwell Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 133 F.2d 258, at page 260. Home Beneficial Life Ins. Co. v. N.L.R. B., 4 Cir., 172 F.2d 62.

And that the findings of the Board are supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, and that the formula used by the Board in computing the amount of back pay was within the discretionary power of the Board, was not arbitrary, and bears an appropriate relation to the policies of the Act; N.L.R.B. v. Seven-Up Bottling Co., 344 U.S. 344, 73 S.Ct. 287, 97 L.Ed. 377; Phelps Dodge Corp. v. N. L.R.B., supra; Marlin-Rockwell Corp. v. N.L.R.B., supra, 133 F.2d at page 260.

It is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed that the respondent, Deena Artware, Incorporated, Paducah, Kentucky, its officers, agents, successors and assigns, shall:

(a) Pay to the employees named in the Appendix attached hereto, who were found to have been discriminated against by a Board Decision and Order issued October 25, 1949, as enforced by this Court, net back pay in the amounts set out in the Appendix.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • NLRB v. Madison Courier, Inc., 24808.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • August 9, 1972
    ...and Iron Corp., 101 NLRB 672, 672-673 (1952), enfd., 208 F.2d 394 (6th Cir. 1953); Deena Artware, Inc., 112 NLRB 371, 375 (1955), enfd., 228 F.2d 871 (6th Cir. 1955). See also Mastro Plastics Corp., 136 NLRB 1342, 1360 (1962), enfd., 354 F.2d 170 (2nd Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 972,......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Deena Artware, 11156.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • December 13, 1958
    ...was to liquidate the amounts which Artware was ordered to pay to its individual employees. N. L. R. B. v. Deena Artware, Inc., 6 Cir., 228 F.2d 871. Artware did not make the payments so ordered. It contended then, as it does now, that it was forced by economic conditions and the labor dispu......
  • United States v. Lightfoot, 11470.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • March 26, 1956
    ...prosecution of Communists under the membership clause of the Smith Act. A similar argument was overruled in the Scales case. We quote with 228 F.2d 871 approval the following from that "The purpose of this provision, as defendant correctly argues, was to insure the enforceability of the reg......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Deena Artware, Inc, 46
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • February 23, 1960
    ...the Court of Appeals ordered Artware, 'its officers, agents, successors and assigns' to pay that amount to specified employees. 6 Cir., 228 F.2d 871, 872. That was on December 16, 1955. In 1957 the Board moved the Court of Appeals for discovery, inspection, and depositions, naming Artware, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT