|
Labor Board v. Duval Jewelry Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 1 (1958)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Labor Board v. Duval Jewelry Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 1 (1958)
National Labor Relations Board v. Duval Jewelry Company of Miami, Inc. No. 234 Argued May 20, 1958 Decided June 9, 1958 357 U.S. 1
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
In a proceeding under the National Labor Relations Act by a union to obtain a representation election among the employees of a retail store, subpoenas duces tecum were issued, directed to respondents, who moved before both the Board and the hearing officer to revoke them. The Board refused to entertain the motions on the ground that, under its rules and regulations, they required an initial ruling by the hearing officer. That officer denied the motions; the ruling was not appealed; respondents refuse to comply with the subpoenas; and the Board instituted proceedings in the District Court to enforce them. The District Court quashed them, and the Court of Appeals sustained the District Court, on the ground that the Board alone could rule on motions to revoke subpoenas duces tecum in representation proceedings.
Held: though §11(1) of the Act gives a person served with a subpoena duces tecum the right to petition the Board to revoke it, there is no illegality in the Board’s delegation of authority to the hearing officer to make a preliminary ruling on such a motion, since the Board reserves to itself the final decision. Therefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings. Pp. 2-8.
(a) Cudahy Packing Co. v. Holland, 315 U.S. 357, and Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking Co., 331 U.S. 111, distinguished. P. 7.
(b) That special permission of the Board is required for an appeal is not important, since that is merely a method of ascertaining whether a substantial question is raised concerning the validity of the subordinate’s ruling, and a decision by the Board that no substantial question is raised satisfies the requirements of § 11(1). Pp. 7-8.
234 F. 2d 427 reversed and cause remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Labor Board v. Duval Jewelry Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 1 (1958) in 357 U.S. 1 357 U.S. 2. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BI7MTTE1CLVFYJ1.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Labor Board v. Duval Jewelry Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 1 (1958), in 357 U.S. 1, page 357 U.S. 2. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BI7MTTE1CLVFYJ1.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Labor Board v. Duval Jewelry Co., Inc., 357 U.S. 1 (1958). cited in 1958, 357 U.S. 1, pp.357 U.S. 2. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=BI7MTTE1CLVFYJ1.
|