NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
v.
PURITY FOOD STORES, INC. (SAV-MORE FOOD STORES)
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
PURITY FOOD STORES, INC. (SAV-MORE FOOD STORES)
389 U.S. 959
Supreme Court of the United States (1967)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 48 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (45 total)
-
S. Fla. Bev. Corp. v. Efrain Figueredo, 409 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…S.Ct. 125, 87 L.Ed. 83 (1942). See also Mumbower v. Callicott, 526 F. 2d 1183, 1187 (8th Cir. 1975); Brennan v. Valley Towing Co., Inc., 515 F. 2d 100, 104-111 (9th Cir. 1975); Triple ‘AAA’ Co. v. Wirtz, 378 F. 2d 884, 887 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 959, 88 S.Ct. 338, 19 L.Ed.2d 364 (1967); St. John v. Brown, 38 F.Supp. 385, 389-390 (N.D.Tex.1941); 29 C.F.R. §§ 778.109, 778.325-326 (1975); cf. Wirtz v. Leon’s Auto Parts Co., 406 F. 2d 1250 (5th Cir. 1969); Flores Hernandez v. Infanteria Thom McAn,…
-
Ehlert v. United States, 402 U.S. 99 (U.S. 1971)…ied Muhammad, 364 F. 2d 223, 224 (CA4); Davis v. United States, 374 F. 2d 1, 4 (CA5); United States v. Taylor, 351 F. 2d 228, 230 (CA6) (semble). Contra, United States v. Gearey, 368 F. 2d 144, 150 (CA2), 379 F. 2d 915 (after remand), cert. denied, 389 U. S. 959; Scott v. Commanding Officer, 431 F. 2d 1132, 1136 (CA3); United States v. Nordlof, 440 F. 2d 840 (CA7); Keene v. United States, 266 F. 2d 378, 384 (CA10); Swift v. Director of Selective Service, — U. S. App. D. C. —, 448 F. 2d 1147. See also United…
-
In re Petition of William D. Scott v. Commanding Officer, 431 F.2d 1132 (3d Cir. 1970)…197 (4th Cir. 1970). . Compare the several opinions in Ehlert v. United States, 422 F. 2d 332 (9th Cir.), cert. granted, 397 U.S. 1074, 90 S.Ct. 1525, 25 L.Ed.2d 808 (1970), with United States v. Gearey, 368 F. 2d 144 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 959, 88 S.Ct. 335, 19 L.Ed.2d 368 (1967). 2a . We do not decide whether the rule should be given retrospective application. . The government argues that petitioner’s claim is barred because he failed to comply with 32 C.F.R. § 1625.1(b) which require…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 45 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence