SANDSTROM

v.

CALIFORNIA HORSE RACING BOARD ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (28 total)

• United Teachers OF Dade, FEA/United AFT, Local 1974, AFL-CIO v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 500 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 1986)
  …etween himself and the employer. See Olguin v. Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co., 740 F. 2d 1468, 1474 (9th Cir. 1984).” Faust v. RCA Corp., 612 F.Supp. 540 (D.C.Pa.1985). In N.L.R.B. v. J.H. Allison & Co., 165 F. 2d 766 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 814, 69 S.Ct. 81, 93 L.Ed. 369 (1948), the court said: We think the logical deduction to be drawn from the opinions of the Supreme Court is that by virtue of the National Labor Relations Act the obligation of the employer to bargain collectively with r…
• Division OF Pari-Mutuel Wagering v. Caple, 362 So. 2d 1350 (Fla. 1978)
  …the protective ambit of the Constitution. It seems apparent, however, that the result on rehearing was attributable primarily to that change in characterization. . Sandstrom v. California Horse Racing Bd., 31 Cal.2d 401, 189 P. 2d 17, cert. denied, 335 U.S. 814, 69 S.Ct. 31, 93 L.Ed. 369 (1948). . Dare v. State of New Jersey, 159 N.J.Super. 533, 388 A. 2d 984 (N.J.Super.Ct.App.Div., opinion filed April 11, 1978). . Jamison v. State Racing Commission, 84 N.M. 679, 507 P. 2d 426 (1973); Sanderson v. New Me…
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp., 385 U.S. 421 (U.S. 1967)
  …an employer may not unilaterally institute merit increases during the term of a collective agreement unless some provision of the contract authorizes him to do so. See Labor Board v. J. H. Allison & Co., 165 F. 2d 766 (C. A. 6th Cir.), cert. denied, 335 U. S. 814. Cf. Beacon Piece Dyeing Co., 121 N. L. R. B. 953 (1958).7 The-argument is, rather, that since the contract contained a provision which might have allowed the respondent to institute the wage plan in question, the Board was powerless to determine wh…