Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB
| Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB | |
|---|---|
| Argued November 6–7, 1950 Decided February 26, 1951 | |
| Full case name | Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board |
| Citations | 340 U.S. 474 (more) 71 S. Ct. 456, 95 L. Ed. 2d 456, 1951 U.S. LEXIS 2428 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Universal Camera Corp., 79 N.L.R.B. 379, 22 L.R.R.M. (BNA) (1948); Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 179 F.2d 749 (2nd Cir. 1950) (enforcing order); cert. granted, 339 U.S. 962 (1950). |
| Holding | |
| A court will defer to a federal agency's findings of fact if supported by "substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole." | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Frankfurter, joined by Vinson, Reed, Jackson, Burton, Clark, Minton |
| Concur/dissent | Black, Douglas |
| Laws applied | |
| Administrative Procedures Act; Taft-Hartley Act | |
English Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 (1951), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that a court will defer to a federal agency's findings of fact if supported by "substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole." Universal Camera added another qualification to the substantial evidence test laid down in Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB. The evidence supporting the agency's conclusion must be substantial in consideration of the record as a whole, even including the evidence that is not consistent with the agency's conclusion.