National Labor Relations Board v. United States Postal Service and American Postal Workers Union

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that briefing on exceptions beforé the Board would be sufficient to preserve an issue
• recognizing that briefing on exceptions before the Board would be sufficient to preserve an issue
• concluding that relevant objection actually was urged and \vigorously disputed by the parties before the Board\
• concluding that Woelke was inapplicable where we were “not being asked to consider a separate issue that was never urged upon the Board”
• rejecting argument that issue not exhausted where, although respondents failed to raise it in cross- exceptions, they re-filed with the Board their briefs to the ALJ, which discussed the issue
• “We hold that the practice is not illegal, and in doing so we necessarily consider the applicable law.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).