TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Robert H. Miller, Regional Director of Region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the National Labor Relations Board v. California Pacific Medical Center, Robert H. Miller, Regional Director of Region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the National Labor Relations Board v. California Pacific Medical Center

Robert H. Miller, Reg'l Dir. of Region 20 of the Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., for & on Behalf of the Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cal. Pac. Med. Ctr., Robert H. Miller, Reg'l Dir. of Region 20 of the Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., for & on Behalf of the Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cal. Pac. Med. Ctr., 2 F.3d 335 (9th Cir. 1993)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
August 27, 1993
Docket
No. 92-15721
Citations
2 F.3d 33593 Daily Journal DAR 11076144 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 210793 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 64721993 U.S. App. LEXIS 22057

Opinion

2 F.3d 335 144 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2107

Robert H. MILLER, Regional Director of region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER, Respondent-Appellee. Robert H. MILLER, Regional Director of region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner-Appellee, v. CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER, Respondent-Appellant.

Nos. 92-15721, 92-15746.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 27, 1993.

Prior report: 9th Cir., 991 F.2d 536 .

Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, BROWNING, HUG, TANG, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, FARRIS, PREGERSON, POOLE, D.W. NELSON, CANBY, NORRIS, REINHARDT, BEEZER, HALL, WIGGINS, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI, NOONAN, THOMPSON, O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, TROTT, FERNANDEZ, RYMER, T.G. NELSON, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.

ORDER 1

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list