International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 722, AFL-CIO
National Labor Relations Board
314 NLRB 1016 (1994)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Rockford Blacktop Construction Company (Rockford) used Kasper Trucking for trucking services. Rockford filed a complaint against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 722 (the union) (defendant) with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (plaintiff). Rockford claimed that the union engaged in unfair labor practices by establishing picket lines at two Rockford jobsites to coerce Rockford to end its relations with Kasper Trucking. At a hearing before administrative-law judge (ALJ) Elbert Gadsden, George Kasper was called as a witness. In response to questions from Judith Poltz, the NLRB’s general counsel, Kasper testified that there was picketing at the Dixon jobsite on January 19, 1993. When Poltz transitioned to a new line of questioning, Gadsden intervened, asking Poltz to pursue the picketing statement further. Specifically, Gadsden directed Poltz to further develop how Kasper learned of the picketing. The union’s counsel, Michael O’Hara, strongly objected to Gadsden’s intervention, resulting in an intense discussion between O’Hara and Gadsden regarding the proper role of ALJs. O’Hara argued that interrupting direct testimony and directing a prosecutor to ask specific questions improperly usurped the prosecutor’s role and undermined the adversarial system. Gadsden overruled O’Hara’s objection, stating emphatically that in an NLRB administrative proceeding,
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 964,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,006 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,006 law school casebooks.

