Case Name: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. SUPAK AND SONS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1973-01-11
Citations: 470 F.2d 998
Docket Number: No. 72-1248
Parties: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. SUPAK AND SONS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 470
Pages: 998–999

Head Matter:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. SUPAK AND SONS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Respondent.
No. 72-1248.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued Oct. 6, 1972.
Decided Jan. 11, 1973.
Leonard Wagner, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Peter G. Nash, Gen. Counsel, Patrick Hardin, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Robert A. Giannasi and Donald W. Savel-son, Attys., Washington, D.C., on brief), for petitioner.
William B. Devaney, Washington, D.C. (Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, D.C., H. Lee Kanter, and Kanter & Kanter, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for respondent.
Before BRYAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The National Labor Relations Board petitioned for enforcement of its order against Supak and Sons Manufacturing Corporation in which the Board found that the company violated § 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act [29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(5) and (1)]. The issues and facts were exhaustively stated by the trial examiner, whose findings, conclusions, and recommendations were adopted by a panel of the Board, one member dissenting. Supak & Sons, 192 N.L.R.B. No. 181, 78 LRRM 1289 (1971). Although there are conflicts in the testimony, we are satisfied, upon consideration of the record, briefs, and oral argument, that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the Board's findings and that its rulings are not erroneous. Accordingly, we enforce the Board's order.