NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WYMAN-GORDON CO. (1969)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 15:18, 23 April 2024 by Matt Latourelle (contribs) (historical scotus page set)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WYMAN-GORDON CO.
Term: 1968
Important Dates
Argued: March 3, 1969
Decided: April 23, 1969
Outcome
Reversed and remanded
Vote
7-2
Judgment of the court
Abe Fortas
Majority
Potter StewartEarl WarrenByron White
Concurring
Hugo BlackWilliam BrennanThurgood Marshall
Dissenting
William DouglasJohn Harlan II

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WYMAN-GORDON CO. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on April 23, 1969. The case was argued before the court on March 3, 1969.

In a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Massachusetts U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1960s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Warren Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Judicial Power - Judicial review of administrative agency's or administrative official's actions and procedures
  • Petitioner: National Labor Relations Board, or regional office or officer
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: 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.
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 394 U.S. 759
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Judgment of the Court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Earl Warren
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Abe Fortas

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 conservative.

See also

External links

Footnotes