NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

IX. LITIGATION
During the third year of its existence, the litigation of the Board
was, for the most part, confined to proceedings for. the enforcement
or review of Board orders. In addition, the Board continued to be
engaged in a small number of injunction proceedings against the
Board and its agents, and in miscellaneous litigation involving the
operations of the Board under the act.
A. INJUNCTION PROCEEDINGS
The tide of injunction suits against the Board and its agents
considered at length in previous annual reports,' virtually subsided
as the Supreme Court on January 5, 1938, rendered its decisions in
Myers et al. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, 303 U. S. 41, and
Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock, Co. v. &haunter et al., 303
U. S. 54• 2 Even prior to those decisions, however, these suits had been
retarded substantially by the Labor Board decisions of the Supreme
Court of April 12, 1937, and by the favorable decisions of the circuit
courts of appeals in injunction proceedings against the Board. Only
five injunction suits 3 were commenced in federal district courts
during this fiscal year. These, together with four other pending
injunction suits,4 were all disposed of favorably to the Board before
the end of the year. 5 Occasional suits in the future along injunction
lines may possibly occur, but, by and large, the decisions of the
Supreme Court end this phase of the Board's history.
B. ENFORCEMENT AND REVIEW
Under section 10 (e) of the act the Board may, if its order is not
complied with, petition any circuit court of appeals wherein the unfair
labor practice in question occurred or wherein the employer resides
or transacts business, for the enforcement of its order. Likewise,
any person aggrieved by a final order of the Board may, under
section 10 (f), obtain a review of such order in any like circuit court
of appeals, or in the circuit court of appeals for the District of Columbia.
The filing of either a petition for enforcement by the Board
or of a petition for review by an employer brings the merits of the
'First Annual Report, ch. IX, pp. 46-50; Second Annual Report, ch. VIII, pp. 31-32.
See ch. VIII, supra.
Aircraft Workers Union, Inc., v. Nylander (S. D. Calif.). Dismissed August 21, 1937;
Washington Shoe Workers Union et al. v. National Labor Relations Board (U. S. D. C. for
D. C.). Dismissed November 5, 1937; Northrop Corp. v. Madden (S. D. Calif.). Dismissed
August 21, 1937; Surpass Leather Co. v. Winters (W. D. New York). Dismissed June
13, 1938; H. E. Fletcher Co. V. Myers (D. Mass.). Dismissed October 15, 1937.
'Myers et al. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, 303 U. S. 41; Myers v. MacKenzie,
303 U. S. 41; Newport News Shipbuilding d Dry Dock Company v. Schauffler et al., 303
U. S. 54; Cocheco Woolen Mfg. Co. v. Myers, 16 F. Supp. 188. (Reversed February 9,
1938, 94 F. (2d) 590 (C. C. A. 1st).)
5 Another suit, Prettyman v. Bowen, commenced in the Circuit Court for Washtenaw
County, Michigan, has not been disposed of, though proceedings under the act have not
been interrupted by it. The Court still has a motion to dismiss under advisement.
221