Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Nathanson Vs. Labor Board

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Nov 10, 1952

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

37 entries 37 unlinked
Show
  1. Nathanson v. Labor
    Search
  2. Board - 344 U.S. 25 (1952) U.S. Supreme Court Nathanson v. Labor
    Search
  3. Board, 344 U.S. 25 (1952) Nathanson v. Labor
    Search
  4. a)(2). Bramwell v. United
    Search
  5. for certiorari was granted because of a conflict on the question of priority between that decision and Labor Board v. Killoren
    Search
  6. The Board is the public agent chosen by Congress to enforce the National Labor Relations Act. Amalgamated Workers v. Edison
    Search
  7. statute by making the employees whole for losses suffered on account of an unfair labor practice. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor
    Search
  8. a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Act. See Brown v. O'Keefe
    Search
  9. See United States v. State
    Search
  10. the public revenue. The beneficiaries of the claims are private persons, as was the receiver in American Surety Co. v. Akron
    Search
  11. Savings Bank, 212 U.S. 557. It is true that Bramwell v. United
    Search
  12. States for Indian moneys. But that case rests on the status of the Indians as wards of the United States, see Bowling v. United
    Search
  13. S. 528 , and the continuing responsibility which it has for the protection of their interests. See United States v. Rickert
    Search
  14. Board of Commissioners v. Seber
    Search
  15. priority to a claim which the United States is collecting for the benefit of a private party. See American Surety Co. v. Akron
    Search
  16. Sampsell v. Imperial
    Search
  17. from the labor market, whether the employee received equivalent employment, and the like. See Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor
    Search
  18. as its agent for the purpose. The bankruptcy court normally supervises the liquidation of claims. See Gardner v. New
    Search
  19. may indicate that a particular controversy should be remitted to another tribunal for litigation. See Thompson v. Magnolia
    Search
  20. the bankruptcy court normally should stay its hand pending an administrative decision. That was our ruling in Smith v. Hoboken
    Search
  21. R. Co., 328 U. S. 123 , and Thompson v. Texas
    Search
  22. Act as analogous to the Government's wardship toward Indians, found to warrant invocation of its priority in Bramwell v. United
    Search
  23. U.S. Supreme Court Nathanson v. Labor
    Search
  24. Bramwell v. United
    Search
  25. and Labor Board v. Killoren
    Search
  26. the National Labor Relations Act. Amalgamated Workers v. Edison
    Search
  27. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor
    Search
  28. of the Bankruptcy Act. See Brown v. O'Keefe
    Search
  29. American Surety Co. v. Akron
    Search
  30. Bowling v. United
    Search
  31. See United States v. Rickert
    Search
  32. See American Surety Co. v. Akron
    Search
  33. See Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor
    Search
  34. See Gardner v. New
    Search
  35. See Thompson v. Magnolia
    Search
  36. Smith v. Hoboken
    Search
  37. and Thompson v. Texas
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial