Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

REGAL KNITWEAR CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (1945)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
REGAL KNITWEAR CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Term: 1944
Important Dates
Argued: December 8, 1944
Decided: January 29, 1945
Outcome
Affirmed (includes modified)
Vote
6-3
Majority
Hugo BlackWilliam DouglasFelix FrankfurterRobert JacksonFrank MurphyWiley Rutledge
Dissenting
Stanley ReedOwen Josephus RobertsHarlan Fiske Stone

REGAL KNITWEAR CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on January 29, 1945. The case was argued before the court on December 8, 1944.

In a 6-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the lower court. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1940s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Stone Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Judicial Power - Federal Rules of Civil Procedure including Supreme Court Rules, application of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure in civil litigation, Circuit Court Rules, and state rules and admiralty rules
  • Petitioner: employer. If employer's relations with employees are governed by the nature of the employer's business (e.g., railroad, boat), rather than labor law generally, the more specific designation is used in place of Employer.
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: National Labor Relations Board, or regional office or officer
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 324 U.S. 9
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Harlan Fiske Stone
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Robert Jackson

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes