Anthony Joseph Celebrezze

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit circuit Deceased · served 1965–1998 Appointed by Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic) 25 signed orders read

Judge Celebrezze no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Celebrezze decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Defers to the labor board's permissible bargaining-unit judgment once statutory boundaries are satisfied.

“Beyond this determination, we are powerless to substitute our judgment for that of the Board.”

Reads the statutory definition of supervisor to require only one listed authority when exercised independently for the employer.

“of the listed categories is a supervisor, according to the statute”

Procedural preferences

Raises mootness independently because it limits federal jurisdiction under Article III.

“Because mootness implicates federal court jurisdiction under Article III, we are obliged to consider the question on our own motion.”

Declines to consider an issue first raised on appeal after it was omitted from earlier state and district-court proceedings.

“Defendant failed to raise this issue previously, either on appeal from his state convictions or in the district court, hence, he is precluded from doing so now.”

Cautions

Requires an evidentiary hearing when affidavits and counsel's statements reveal a substantial dispute over settlement terms.

“the Court could not properly resolve this substantial factual dispute and discredit McIntyre’s allegations by merely weighing the affidavits and relying upon the un-sworn statements of counsel.”

Treats exclusion of an injured party from trial as reversible when the party's presence could assist presentation of the case.

“If there is any indication that the plaintiff’s presence could have assisted in the presentation of his case, we believe that his exclusion would require reversal.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

National Labor Relations Board v. Washington Manor, Inc.
· 1975-07-24
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted

“Therefore, enforcement is granted.”

Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Brinegar
· 1974-04-03
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The order of the District Court remanding the ease to the Secretary is therefore reversed.”

Kukla v. National Distillers Products Co.
· 1973-08-02
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the case is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the disputed terms of the purported settlement agreement.”

Johnson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
· 1974-04-09
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“the decision of the Tax Court is affirmed.”

Michigan Hospital Service Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
· 1972-12-19
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“The Board’s order is therefore enforced.”

Bryant v. International Union, United Mine Workers of America
· 1972-09-26
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, the judgment below is affirmed.”

United States v. O'Dell
· 1972-06-16
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The error committed by the District Court in instructing the jury requires that the judgments be vacated and the causes remanded to the District Court for new trials.”

Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
· 1970-06-10
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted

“The Company’s petition to review is granted, and the Labor Board’s cross-application to enforce is denied.”

Schatten v. United States
· 1969-11-28
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“This cause is remanded to the District Court with the suggestion that it treat the action as a mandamus proceeding”

United States v. Ross Corp.
· 1967-12-01
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Madison v. Wood
· 1969-04-24
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Affirmed.”

American Bread Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
· 1969-05-14
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted in part

“Accordingly, the Board’s order will be enforced without modification. In Case No. 18,567 we find there was not substantial evidence supporting the Board’s decision. Therefore, enforcement of the Board’s order will be denied.”

A historical record

Judge Celebrezze no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.