Task: songer_weightev

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. You will be asked a question pertaining to issues that may appear in any civil law cases including civil government, civil private, and diversity cases. The issue is: "Did the factual interpretation by the court or its conclusions (e.g., regarding the weight of evidence or the sufficiency of evidence) favor the appellant?" This includes discussions of whether the litigant met the burden of proof. Answer the question based on the directionality of the appeals court decision. If the court discussed the issue in its opinion and answered the related question in the affirmative, answer "Yes". If the issue was discussed and the opinion answered the question negatively, answer "No". If the opinion considered the question but gave a mixed answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part, answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion does not discuss the issue, or notes that a particular issue was raised by one of the litigants but the court dismissed the issue as frivolous or trivial or not worthy of discussion for some other reason, answer "Issue not discussed". If the opinion considered the question but gave a "mixed" answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part (or if two issues treated separately by the court both fell within the area covered by one question and the court answered one question affirmatively and one negatively), answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion either did not consider or discuss the issue at all or if the opinion indicates that this issue was not worthy of consideration by the court of appeals even though it was discussed by the lower court or was raised in one of the briefs, answer "Issue not discussed".

PER CURIAM.
Petition by National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order directing the respondent to cease and desist from certain unfair labor practices and to take certain affirmative action. The only question before us is whether the evidence supports the Board’s finding that Arden did not disestablish the “Association”, which was admittedly a company dominated union, but continued it in existence under the name of the “Independent”. Without reciting the evidence, it will suffice to say that the Board’s finding is supportable. See National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., 2 Cir., Nov. 1, 1943, 138 F.2d 885. Paragraph 2(c) of the order is modified by adding the following suffix: “but the employees are free to organize any union they choose, whether or not it is affiliated with a national union.” See Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 2 Cir., 112 F.2d 657, 661; National Labor Relations Board v. Standard Oil Co., supra. As thus modified the order is affirmed and enforcement granted.

Question: Did the factual interpretation by the court or its conclusions (e.g., regarding the weight of evidence or the sufficiency of evidence) favor the appellant?
A. No
B. Yes
C. Mixed answer
D. Issue not discussed
Answer:

Answer: B