Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided 1944-04-10

Cited by 371 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Mr. Justice Rutledge, dissenting: I dissent. The story told by this record is not of a dominating or intermeddling employer, interfering with employees in their collective bargaining arrangements or activities. It is rather of one which sought to do no more than meet its employees’ wishes, freely formed and freely stated; and at the same time to be sure it would do nothing to violate the law governing their rela…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.