National Labor Relations Board v. Business Machine, Local 459 (Royal Typewriter Co.)
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
228 F.2d 553 (1955)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Royal Typewriter Co. (Royal) (defendant) could not reach a collective-bargaining agreement with the union representing Royal’s service employees (plaintiff). The service employees customarily repaired Royal’s typewriters at Royal’s offices or at a customer’s place of business. Royal was obligated to repair machines under warranty or contractual arrangement. The union called a strike against Royal. During the employee strike, Royal implemented an alternative system to meet its repair obligations: Royal instructed its contract customers to (1) call an independent repair company (Typewriter Maintenance and Sales Company or Tytell Typewriter Company), (2) have that company perform the repair, and (3) submit receipts to Royal. Customers mostly sent Royal the unpaid repair bill, and Royal directly paid the independent company. The union peacefully picketed the entrances of the independent repair companies, holding signs that identified the strike against Royal and the repair company’s employees as “strikebreakers.” The National Labor Relations Board (the board) found that the union’s picketing of Royal’s independent repair companies was unlawful. The Second Circuit reviewed the matter.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lumbard, J.)
Concurrence (Hand, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.