Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing Murphy Oil I and noting that the “Board will not be surprised that we adhere, as we must, to [Horton II”
• reversing Murphy Oil I and noting that the “Board will not be surprised that we adhere, as we must, to [Horton II]”
• reversing Murphy Oil I and noting that the “Board will not be surprised that we adhere, as we must, to [Horton II]”
• denying enforcement in relevant part and concluding that the employer “committed no unfair labor practice by requiring employees to relinquish their right to pursue class or collective claims in all forums by signing the arbitration agreements at issue”
• upholding its earlier holding in D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB, 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013), that arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims do not violate the NLRA and are enforceable under the FAA
• upholding its earlier holding in D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB, 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013), that arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims do not violate the NLRA and are enforceable under the FAA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).