Mercy Hospital of Buffalo

336 N.L.R.B. 1282 (2001)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Mercy Hospital of Buffalo

National Labor Relations Board
336 N.L.R.B. 1282 (2001)

  • Written by Tammy Boggs, JD

Facts

Catholic Health System owned five hospitals in New York, including Mercy Hospital of Buffalo (Mercy) (defendant) and Our Lady of Victoria Hospital (Victoria). A labor union (the union) (plaintiff) had a collective-bargaining agreement with Mercy. At one point in time, all magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI) ordered by doctors at Mercy took place at a certain medical park, and the union represented the MRI technologists who worked at the medical park. In 1997, Mercy, Victoria, and Abbott Radiology (Abbott) discussed the formation of a joint venture to purchase a new, technologically advanced MRI machine. Following the discussions, two new companies were formed: MRI Associates, LLC (owned 25 percent, 25 percent, and 50 percent, respectively, by Mercy, Victoria, and Abbott) and Southtowns (owned 50/50 by Mercy and Victoria). Mercy leased land to MRI Associates, which constructed a building. MRI Associates purchased and installed the new MRI machine in the building. Southtowns leased the building and the new machine from MRI Associates. Abbott, through its wholly owned subsidiary Orchard Park, managed and operated the new MRI machine at the Southtowns facility. The MRI employees at Southtowns were employed by Orchard Park. Thereafter, Mercy began scheduling all its MRI scans at Southtowns and discontinued MRI at the medical park. Two full-time MRI-technologist positions were eliminated at the medical park. The union filed a grievance against Mercy with the National Labor Relations Board (the board), complaining of Mercy’s failure to apply their collective-bargaining agreement to the employees providing MRI services at Southtowns. An administrative law judge found that Mercy and Southtowns were a single employer with no separate corporate identity. The board reviewed the matter.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (No information provided)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 820,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 989 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership