Case Name: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. NASHUA PRE-CAST CORPORATION, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1973-03-16
Citations: 475 F.2d 765
Docket Number: No. 72-1339
Parties: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. NASHUA PRE-CAST CORPORATION, Respondent.
Judges: Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, AlDRICH and McENTEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 475
Pages: 765–766

Head Matter:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. NASHUA PRE-CAST CORPORATION, Respondent.
No. 72-1339.
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
Argued March 6, 1973.
Decided March 16, 1973.
Edward N. Bomsey, Attorney, Washington, D. C., with whom Peter G. Nash, General Counsel, Patrick Hardin, Associate General Counsel, Marcel MalletPrevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Leonard M. Wagman, Attorney, Los Angeles, Cal., were on brief, for petitioner.
Julius Kirie, Boston, Mass., for respondent.
Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, AlDRICH and McENTEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The basic question presented on this petition for enforcement is whether there was substantial evidence to support the Board's findings. Without in any way departing from our rule that the burden of producing evidence, as distinguished from speculation, is on the Board, e. g., NLRB v. Millard Metal Service Center, Inc., 1 Cir., 1973, 472 F.2d 647; Cross Baking Co. v. NLRB, 1 Cir., 1971, 453 F.2d 1346, respondent's criticism of the Board's decision, 198 N.L.R.B. No. 30 (1972), cannot be viewed as of that nature. Respondent's over-extensive briefing recites evidence which might have warranted a different result, but it does not require us to reject the evidence on which the Board relied, or the inferences it reasonably drew therefrom.
The order will be enforced.