National Labor Relations Board v. Spitzer Motor Sales, Inc, 211 F.2d 235 (2d Cir. 1954)
Annotate this CaseDecided March 24, 1954
Melvin Pollack, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C. (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Samuel M. Singer, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.
Arthur Kaplan, New York City, for respondent.
Before CLARK, MEDINA, and HARLAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The objections raised to enforcement of the order of the National Labor Relations Board against this respondent rest entirely upon disputed issues of fact which the Board, making its own findings, 102 N.L.R.B. 437, has resolved in a careful and discriminating manner fully supported by the evidence. The assertions by respondent in oral argument as to some late agreement of adjustment with the complaining union present no issue for us on this proceeding. National Labor Relations Board v. Mexia Textile Mills, 339 U.S. 563, 567-568, 70 S. Ct. 833, 94 L. Ed. 1067; National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aircraft Corp., 2 Cir., 206 F.2d 235, 238; National Labor Relations Board v. General Motors Corp., 2 Cir., 179 F.2d 221, 222.
An order of enforcement will issue.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
