OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# National Labor Relations Board v. Reliance Fuel Oil Corporation/Concurrence Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
371 U.S. 224
National Labor Relations Board v. Reliance Fuel Oil Corporation
Argued: Dec. 3, 1962. --- Decided: Jan 7, 1963
Mr. Justice BLACK concurs in the result.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Labor Relations Board v. Rockaway News Supply Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
345 U.S. 71
National Labor Relations Board v. Rockaway News Supply Company
Argued: Jan. 14, 1953. --- Decided: March 9, 1953
Mr. Frederick U. Reel, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. julius Kass, New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Labor Relations Board v. Raytheon Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
398 U.S. 25
National Labor Relations Board v. Raytheon Company
Argued: Feb. 26, 1970. --- Decided: May 18, 1970
Richard G. Kleindienst, Deputy Atty. Gen. of United States, for petitioner.
Charles H. Resnick, Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Opinion of the Court by Mr. Justice MARSHALL, announced by Mr. Justice STEWART.
This case was brought here on certiorari by the National Labor Relations Board for review of the dismissal of its petition for enforcement of a cease-and-desist order forbidding certain conduct of the Raytheon Company found to be in violations of § 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (1).
After it lost a representation election conducted by the Board on February 4, 1965, the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, filed objections to the election and unfair labor practice charges, both based on pre-election misconduct of the company. On October 19, 1965, an unfair labor practice complaint issued alleging violations of § 8(a)(1). The proceedings on that charge were consolidated with the objections to the election case, and a hearing was held before a Trial Examiner. Thereafter, on October 5, 1966, the Board rendered its decision, ordering that a new election be held and that the company cease and desist certain anti-union activity.
On February 8, 1968, pursuant to § 10(e) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 160(e), the Board filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit seeking enforcement of its unfair labor practice order. The company answered, urging that enforcement be denied on the merits and on the ground that the proceedings were moot because a second election had been held in the interim. After the case was briefed and argued on the merits, the company called to the attention of the court that yet a third election had been held and that this time the result (a majority vote for 'no union') had been certified by the Board. The question whether this intervening election had mooted the case was briefed on all sides; and, on the authority of its earlier decision in General Engineering, Inc. v. NLRB, 311 F.2d 570 (C.A.9th Cir. 1962), the Court of Appeals dismissed the proceedings with a brief per curiam. 408 F.2d 681 (C.A.9th Cir. 1969). We granted certiorari, 396 U.S. 900, 90 S.Ct. 215, 24 L.Ed.2d 177 (1969), and we reverse.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Labor Relations Board v. Reliance Fuel Oil Corporation

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Concurring Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
371 U.S. 224
National Labor Relations Board v. Reliance Fuel Oil Corporation
Argued: Dec. 3, 1962. --- Decided: Jan 7, 1963
Louis F. Claiborne, New Orleans, La., for petitioner.
S. H. Borenkind, New York City, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Labor Relations Board v. Sands Manufacturing Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
306 U.S. 332
National Labor Relations Board v. Sands Mfg Company
Argued: Jan. 12, 1939. --- Decided: Feb 27, 1939
[Syllabus from pages 332-334 intentionally omitted]
The Attorney General, and Mr. Charles A. Horsky, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Harry E. Smoyer, of Cleveland, Ohio, for respondent.
Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Labor Relations Board v. Rockaway News Supply Company/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
345 U.S. 71
National Labor Relations Board v. Rockaway News Supply Company
Argued: Jan. 14, 1953. --- Decided: March 9, 1953
Mr. Justice BLACK, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and Mr. Justice MINTON concur, dissenting.
Section 7 of the Taft-Hartley Act recognizes a right of employees to work together in 'concerted activities' for their mutual aid and protection. One way some union men help others is to refrain from crossing picket lines. Habitual respect for union picket lines has long been the practice of union men. This practice has been a prized asset of the unions. The Taft-Hartley Act was designed to regulate and restrict the type of concerted activities in which employees could engage. But even that Act did not attempt to deprive unions of the advantage of a policy that required union men to respect picket lines. In § 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, Congress specifically declared that none of its union-restrictive provisions should be construed to make it unlawful for a man to refuse to cross a picket line thrown up to support a lawful strike. Consequently I agree with the Labor Board that it was an unfair labor practice for this employer to discharge a union employee who refused to cross a picket line. In holding to the contrary I think the Court takes away rights of employees that the Taft-Hartley Act left standing.
I say this despite the fact that the Court's opinion is based upon its interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement. In the first place, I would accept the Labor Board's holding that the contract did not conform to the requirements of the Taft-Hartley law. It seems to me an unwise precedent for the Court to substitute its judgment about ths contract for that of the Board. In the second place, I can find no language in that contract which would justify the discharge of the employee here because he insisted upon respecting a union picket line-a right reserved to each employee by reason of § 8(b)(4) (D) of the Act. Believing that the Court departs from the Act's policy in holding as it does, I would affirm the Board's order.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States (257 U.S. 591)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
257 U.S. 591
New York v. United States
Argued: Oct. 19 and 20, 1921. --- Decided: Feb 27, 1922
Mr. Edward G. Griffin, of Albany, N. Y., for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 592-597 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Walter C. Noyes, of New York City, Alfred P. Thom, of Washington, D. C., Richard W. Barrett and George F. Brownell, both of New York City, P. J. Farrell, of Washington, D. C., William S. Jenney and C. L. Andrus, both of New York City, for appellees Railroads.
Mr. John E. Benton, of Washington, D. C., for 45 States, amici curiae.
Mr. Patrick J. Farrell, of Washington, D. C., for Interstate Commerce Commission.
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "New York v. United States."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* New York v. United States (257 U.S. 591)
* New York v. United States (331 U.S. 284)
* New York v. United States (342 U.S. 882)
* New York v. United States (386 U.S. 349)
* New York v. United States (396 U.S. 281)
See also United States v. New York.
# New York v. United States (342 U.S. 882)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
342 U.S. 882
New York v. United States (342 U.S. 882)
Statement of Jurisdiction Distributed Oct. 26, 1951.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 7, 1952.
See 342 U.S. 911, 72 S.Ct. 301.
Messrs. Nathaniel L. Goldstein, Attorney General of New York, Lawrence E. Walsh and George H. Kenny, for appellants.
Solicitor General Perlman, and Mr. J. Stanley Payne, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States (386 U.S. 349)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
386 U.S. 349
New York v. United States (386 U.S. 349)
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of New York, Ruth Kessler Toch, Sol. Gen., Dunton F. Tynan, Asst. Sol. Gen., Matthew A. Tiffany, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Walter J. Myskowski, for appellant.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginnane and Leonard S. Goodman, for the United States and others.
R. J. Murphy and D. M. Tolmie, for appellee railroads.
William C. Sennett, Atty. Gen., and Edward Friedman, for appellee Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Eugene T. Liipfert, for appellees Port Authority of Allegheny County and others.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States (386 U.S. 349)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
386 U.S. 349
New York v. United States (386 U.S. 349)
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States (331 U.S. 284)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
331 U.S. 284
New York v. United States (331 U.S. 284)
Argued: March 3, 4, 5, 1947. --- Decided: May 12, 1947
See 331 U.S. 866, 67 S.Ct. 1527.
Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
[Syllabus from pages 284-286 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Parker McCollester, of New York City, for appellants State of New York and others.
Mr. Henry F. Foley, of Boston, Mass., for appellants State of Maine and others.
Mr. Douglas F. Smith, of Chicago, Ill., for appellants A., T. & S.F.R. Co. and others.
Mr. Edward H. Miller, of Washington, D.C., for The United States.
Mr. Daniel W. Knowlton, of Washington, D.C., for Interstate Commerce Commission.
Mr. J. V. Norman, of Washington, D.C., for Southern States & Southern Governors' Conference.
Mr. Byron M. Gary, of Topeka, Kan., for States of Arkansas, Kansas, and others.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York v. United States (342 U.S. 882)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
342 U.S. 882
New York v. United States (342 U.S. 882)
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, dissenting. DP The Interstate Commerce Commission has ordered intrastate commuters' fares of the New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company increased in New York to the level of interstate commuters' fares. The Commission found that the transportation conditions surrounding intrastate trains were substantially similar to those surrounding interstate trains. Interstate fares were determined to be reasonable. But present intrastate fares were found not to be producing a reasonable return on investment. The Commission concluded that persons and localities in interstate commerce, and interstate commerce, were being unduly discriminated against. Pursuant to s 13(4) of the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. s 13(4), 49 U.S.C.A. s 13(4), it ordered intrastate fares raised to the level of interstate fares to remove the discrimination. A three-judge district court affirmed the order of the Commission as to the finding of discrimination against interstate commerce, but did not pass on the finding of discrimination against persons and localities in interstate commerce. 98 F.Supp. 855.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# More Translations from the Chinese/Winter Night

​[25] WINTER NIGHT
[Written during his retirement in 812]
My house is poor; those that I love have left me; My body sick; I cannot join the feast. There is not a living soul before my eyes As I lie alone locked in my cottage room. My broken lamp burns with a feeble flame; My tattered curtains are crooked and do not meet. "Tsek, tsek" on the door-step and window-sill Again I hear the new snow fall. As I grow older, gradually I sleep less; I wake at midnight and sit up straight in bed. If I had not learned the "art of sitting and forgetting," How could I bear this utter loneliness? Stiff and stark my body cleaves to the earth; Unimpeded my soul yields to Change. So has it been for four hateful years, Through one thousand and three hundred nights!
* ↑ Yen Hui told Confucius that he had acquired the "art of sitting and forgetting." Asked what that meant, Yen Hui replied, "I have learnt to discard my body and obliterate my intelligence; to abandon matter and be impervious to sense-perception. By this method I become one with the All-Pervading."—Chuang Tzŭ, chap. vi.
* ↑ "Change" is the principle of endless mutation which governs the Universe.
# More songs by the fighting men. Soldiers poets: second series/A. Newberry Choyce

A. NEWBERRY CHOYCE
Lieut., Leicestershire Regiment
Supermen
SOME souls there are Who in their trial hours Bathe in the very blood Which flows around the heart of Life, And know its joy—and know its agony. Daring to follow impulse That any God Himself would not resist.
Stand back! You weaklings of the world Boasting the name of men. Preening yourselves And judging with your "God this——" and "God that——" Dare not to come Near these.
Stay with your narrow Gods Who smugly sit Within four chapel walls On Sundays, ​You in some stiff God's house Who kneel and shiver Towards a judgment day Of your own setting.
But if a Destiny too kind Bring you for one short second Closer to wisdom; To the breathing hills and spaces Where my God lives And makes His Throne in every leaf and flower And whispers in each wind, Then I will tell you this— That my God is so great I doubt if He will dare To judge these souls.
Reincarnation
I LOVED you in Babylon. Sweet Heart! you were a dancer then And I watched where your little feet Just stirred the dust within the market-place. You passed me slow and down the sunlit street, I saw the longing in the eyes of men ​Who caught the smile which glorified your face. A moment—little heart!—and you were gone; But where you passed—you knew it not— I marked and kissed the spot.
I loved you in royal Rome. Sweet Heart! you were a vestal there And I came to offer my gift. A poor slave with a pigeon dearly bought, Its feathers purer than snow's whitest drift. With fevered soul I made my silent prayer Though I could never touch the bliss I sought, While holy Vesta's temple was your home. A feather fell—how should you see?— Till death it stayed with me.
I love you in London town. Sweet Heart! you are a princess now And the blue blood runs in your veins; While I, alas! am but of common birth Whom war is splashing with its crimson stains. A soldier who has taken Honour's vow To share the grandest task on God's wide earth. One night you wore red roses in your gown. A petal dropped—you never guessed— I hid it in my breast.
​So shall I still love on. Sweet Heart! your soul was close to me When the world's first dreams were made. We two were whispering love at God's own side Or ever sunlight on the mountains played. And through a wilderness of worlds I see A time when reunited we shall glide Unto the Soul of souls, the Perfect One. Pass, life or lives! you'll understand When Love gives me your hand.
Loss
THE world went blind to-day Groping with shattered faith. And in the lonely awful night Madness stalked, taunting me. The gibbering ghoulish wraith Of dreams unrealised Sprang up and mocked my way; Just that in one wild spot beyond the sea, A dear heart that I prized Passed to the Silent Light.
​They say his soul lives on— That I shall find Him safe in God's eternity. To-night, to-night, this aching in my breast, This wildness in my mind Cries to the farthest cruel star:— "O Thou to Whom his soul has gone, Spare me his lips love-prest! In this pained night eternity is far— God! give his dear warm body back to me."
# More songs by the fighting men. Soldiers poets: second series/Clifford J. Druce

CLIFFORD J. DRUCE
2nd Lieut., Gloucester Regiment
Forecast
IF I should chance to fall, and find A last couch on this soil of France, Do not seek out with yearning mind The place, nor give my grave one glance.
The cross would mark a cenotaph; And careless of the flesh thus laid In unfamiliar earth, I'd laugh To know how quickly it decayed.
My spirit, freed, impatient still At the irrelevant, blind stroke That stole the servant of its will With all half-done, with thews unbroke,
Would swiftly reach the land which knew The love that time had not yet staled, And haunt the country whence it drew The life that has not sped nor failed.
​Perhaps beside some lonely copse A brook would flow with less of ease, The brooding wind that sways the tops Murmur more plaintive in the trees.
And should you, lingering there alone, Feel on your face, some evening Its touch, that stranger, rarer grown, Clothes some sweet, straining, half-spoke thing;
Know that the fate self-fixed must yet Endure, whether I die or live; And I still strive to ease the debt Of kisses I was born to give.
France, May, 1917.
To a Grave of the Glosters
A WOODEN cross above your head, You lie, your course already sped; And in this alien plain must rest The bones and body Cotswold bred.
Not long since, insolent with life You made the beech-topped barrow rife With your tumultuous vivid youth, With other lads, in sport and strife.
​And though you shook the earth o'er those Old warriors, close couched there in rows, Your careless clamour had no power To trouble their sublime repose:
Who, if they felt at all the tread Of such as you pass overhead, Wise with the wisdom of long years Were patient, knowing that their bed
Was spacious, patient too, withal; That centuries after you were thrall To undistinguished dust, they still Would hold their place, each in his stall.
But now, ere many months are told Over your head, encased in mould, Children may play, with little care Of one beneath them, silent, cold.
Take my salute: ere twenty years You knew, you reckon as your peers The men of axe and spear of stone, As far removed as they from fears
And doubts that vex men such as me. From all demands from henceforth free On weary limbs and spirit tired, You hold eternity in fee.
Spring in Picardy
WHEN earth was bare, and sky a murky pall, And snow and sleet filled all the miles and days That held us two asunder, all my gaze Was bounded by an impenetrable wall Of chill, numbed, burdened hours, that rose so tall I only dimly knew that your fair ways Lay far beyond it, where desire could raise To bring you nearer, no sufficient call.
Ah God! that blank was better borne than this Flushed wantonness of May, these maiden leaves That bare themselves to bathe in the ardent moon. There is a false note in the wood-dove's croon; And all is meaningless, show that deceives, Hollow, lacking its core and clue—your kiss.
# More Translations from the Chinese/Written when Governor of Soochow

​[47] WRITTEN WHEN GOVERNOR OF SOOCHOW
[A.D. 825]
A Government building, not my own home. A Government garden, not my own trees. But at Lo-yang I have a small house And on Wei River I have built a thatched hut. I am free from the ties of marrying and giving in marriage; If I choose to retire, I have somewhere to end my days. And though I have lingered long beyond my time, To retire now would be better than not at all!
# More songs by the fighting men. Soldiers poets: second series/Carroll Carstairs

CARROLL CARSTAIRS
Lieut., Grenadier Guards
Death in France
IF I should die while I am yet in France Before the battle clouds have rolled away, Give me to feel that death will but enhance Life's secret vision on its passing day. Grant then to me new, individual power In reverie, whilst whimsically I trace Thro' eager, breathless youth, each pulsing hour, The light and shadow on its fading face. And in death's soonest minute let me seek Life heightened by new splendour, poise, surprise, New colour flushing deep its paling cheek, New wonder looking from its tired eyes. Time's brought a rare patine to old Romance— Death has an ancient dignity in France.
France, November, 1916.
The Lover's Mood
I SAID a careless word, then miserably Repented, asked forgiveness in sweet rhyme; Your face had clouded so, and suddenly The day had grown a-weary ere her time.
Life and Death
IF death should come with his cold, hasty kiss Along the trench or in the battle strife, I'll ask of death no greater boon than this: That it shall be as wonderful as life.