HARRAH'S CLUB

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• United States v. Leach, 427 F.2d 1107 (1st Cir. 1970)
  …a whole, the charge was fair and impartial. See Devine v. United States, 403 F. 2d 93, 96 (10th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 1003, 89 S.Ct. 1599, 22 L.Ed.2d 780 (1969); Harris v. United States, 367 F. 2d 633, 636 (1st Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 915, 87 S.Ct. 862, 17 L.Ed.2d 787 (1967). Defendants also complain that they were prejudiced by the court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the theory of their defense. It is reversible error for the court to refuse a request to instruct as to defendan…
• United States v. Previte, 648 F.2d 73 (1st Cir. 1981)
  …with respect to each element omitted from the transparencies. Taking the jury charge as a whole, Cupp v. Naughten, 414 U.S. 141, 146-47, 94 S.Ct. 396, 400, 38 L.Ed.2d 368 (1973); Harris v. United States, 367 F. 2d 633 (1st Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 915, 87 S.Ct. 862, 17 L.Ed.2d 787 (1967), we are not certain whether such omissions would constitute reversible error even, if raised at trial. But no objection to the use of the transparencies having been raised at trial, and defense counsel instead ha…
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Anthony Co., 557 F.2d 692 (9th Cir. 1977)
  …discrimination.’ ” NLRB v. Timberland Packing Corp., 550 F. 2d 500, 501 (9th Cir. 1977), quoting NLRB v. Carroll-Naslund Disposal, Inc., 359 F. 2d 779, 780 (9th Cir. 1966); see NLRB v. Harrah’s Club, 362 F. 2d 425, 427 (9th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 915, 87 S.Ct. 859, 17 L.Ed.2d 788 (1967). Moreover, substantial prejudice flowing from the Board’s assertion of jurisdiction over one industry but not another must be shown. NLRB v. Harrah’s Club, supra, at 427. Neither unjust discrimination nor substa…