Southport Petroleum Co. v. Labor Board,
315 U.S. 100 (1942)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Southport Petroleum Co. v. Labor Board, 315 U.S. 100 (1942)

Southport Petroleum Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

No. 67

Argued January 5, 1942

Decided January 19, 1942

315 U.S. 100


1. An application to the Circuit Court of Appeals, under § 10(e) of the National Labor Relations Act, for leave to adduce additional evidence before the Board is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court. P. 315 U. S. 104.

2. A Labor Board order required a Texas corporation, its officers, agents, successors and assigns, to desist from certain unfair labor practices; to offer reinstatement to employees found to have been discriminatorily discharged; to grant them backpay; to post certain notices at its Texas refinery, etc. Pending a petition of the Board to enforce the order, the corporation applied to the court under § 10(e) of the Act for leave to adduce additional

Page 315 U. S. 101

evidence before the Board, averring that it had distributed all of its assets to its four stockholders as a liquidating dividend, and that two of them, who had received the Texas refinery in which the unfair labor practices were employed, had conveyed it to a newly organized Delaware corporation whose stockholders were at no time stockholders of the employer corporation, and later, in its answer, it alleged that it had very recently been dissolved pursuant to the statutes of Texas, and prayed a dismissal of the Board's petition upon that ground.

Held: under these circumstances and others disclosed by the record, that denial of the application to adduce additional evidence was not error. P. 315 U. S. 104.

117 F.2d 90 affirmed.

Certiorari, 313 U.S. 558, to review a decree directing the enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board, and therein denying a motion for leave to adduce additional evidence.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.