New Process Steel 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.

• agreeing with the board that “in federal labor law, as in common law, an agreement is judged by conduct evidencing an agreement rather than a party’s subjective belief”
• considering the Senate Report and concluding that “Congress[’s] ... primary concern was increasing the efficiency of the Board----The purpose of the [Tafb-Hartley] revisions ... was to allow the NLRB to hear more cases by creating panels of the entire Board.”
• “To the extent that the legislative history points either way ... it establishes that Taft-Hartley created a Board that functioned as an adjudicative body that was allowed to operate in panels in order to work more efficiently.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).