Special Litigation Involving NLRB; Outcome of Proceedings in Which Court Decisions Issued in Fiscal Year 1997

p. 171. MAJOR RELIABILITY WARNING — the body digits should be re-read at higher resolution before use. The crop is a landscape table printed sideways on the page and is NOT turned upright in this image: the whole table is rotated 90 degrees (row labels and headings read bottom-to-top). At the delivered scale the single-digit body cells are at or past the limit of legibility, and I could not resolve most of them; where I could not distinguish a glyph I have recorded "0", which is certainly wrong in a number of cells. Concrete evidence that the body reading is incomplete: the "Totals—all types" line reads cleanly and is internally consistent (32 = 14+13+5; 30 = 12+13+5; 2 = 2+0+0; and within each court group Number decided = Upholding + Contrary). But the body cells I was able to resolve sum to only 19 proceedings, not 32 — about 13 proceedings sit in cells I have transcribed as "0". In particular: - Every "Number decided" column (cols 1, 4, 7, 10) reads as all zeros below the totals line, which is logically impossible, since for several rows I do read a non-zero value in the adjoining "Upholding Board position" column (e.g. "To enforce subpoena or contempt of subpoena" in courts of appeals, "Issue complaint" in district courts). Treat every detail-row "Number decided" cell, and all four "Total—all courts" columns below the totals line, as unread rather than as a printed 0. - The five bold section lines ("NLRB-initiated actions or interventions", "Action by other parties", "To review:", "To restrain NLRB from", "To compel NLRB to:") each carry a printed glyph in all twelve columns — they are subtotal lines, not bare captions — but I could not resolve any of those glyphs and have recorded them all as "0". Their true subtotals are unknown. - The three bankruptcy-court columns: the totals line prints 5 / 5 / 0, but the only bankruptcy detail values I could resolve are 1 for "To compel compliance with reorganization plan" and 1 for "To determine Board's claim to be nondischargeable"; three further bankruptcy proceedings are in cells I read as 0 (most likely somewhere in rows 3-7). - Courts of appeals prints 2 "Contrary to Board position", but every detail cell in that column read as 0 to me; those 2 are unlocated. Cells I have moderate confidence in, beyond the totals line (all in "Upholding Board position" columns): courts of appeals — To enforce subpoena or contempt of subpoena 1, Prosecutorial discretion 2, Proceeding in R case 1, Proceeding in unfair labor practice case 1, Issue complaint 2; district courts — To dismiss action within Board's exclusive jurisdiction 1, Prosecutorial discretion 1, Proceeding in R case 1, Proceeding in unfair labor practice case 2, Issue complaint 3, Take action in R case 1, Comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 1; bankruptcy courts — To compel compliance with reorganization plan 1, To determine Board's claim to be nondischargeable 1. Even for these, my horizontal placement of a glyph against its row was sometimes uncertain by one row. Row-label notes: "To determine Board's claim to be nondischargeable" renders in the scan roughly as "nodischargable"; I have written the standard spelling, since the degradation is almost certainly scan noise. "To review:" and "To compel NLRB to:" carry printed colons; "To restrain NLRB from" appears to have none, but I could not be certain. The FOIA row carries a raised 1 footnote marker. Crop notes: no footnote text is visible anywhere in this crop even though the raised 1 marker is present, so `footnotes` is empty — the footnote presumably falls just outside the crop at the table's foot (the right-hand edge of this rotated image). The caption line is likewise outside the crop. Column count (13 = stub + 4 court groups x 3) was taken from the column rules and the four heading levels and is solid.

p. 172. The crop is a landscape table reproduced on its side (rotated 90 degrees, reading bottom-to-top); it has been transcribed in upright reading order. It is a continuation page: the "—Continued" caption line is clipped at the edge, and the earlier rows of the table are on the preceding page, so "Other" here is the last main category with its detail breakdown beneath it. Printed inconsistency, transcribed as printed and not corrected: every "Number decided" column (all four court groups) and the entire "Total—all courts" group are printed as 0, including on the "Other" row, even though the detail rows carry court determinations (e.g. EAJA shows 3 upholding and 2 contrary in courts of appeals, yet its "Number decided" cells and all of its "Total—all courts" cells read 0). This looks like a compositor omission rather than a reading error on my part; I re-read those bands three times and saw only zeros. The column placement of the non-zero values was cross-checked against the subject matter and is consistent: "Objection to Board's proof of claim" (2) and "To oppose set off to Board's claim" (1) fall in the bankruptcy-court group; EAJA (3 upholding, 2 contrary) and "Denying stay pending certiorari" (1) in courts of appeals; "Denying attorney's fees in Rehabilitation Act" (1) and "Denying attorney's fees in FOIA" (1) in district courts; "To involuntarily join Board as a party" has 1 in courts of appeals and 1 in district courts. Footnote 1 is printed under the table but no raised marker was legible anywhere in the scan; from its wording it almost certainly keys to the "Denying attorney's fees in FOIA" row label, so no marker was written into any cell. The footnote line itself is clipped along the bottom edge of the crop, so its final words are read from partly cut glyphs. Scan quality is poor (coarse 1-bit sideways scan, broken serifs); the residual risk is that an isolated digit in one of the all-zero bands is not actually a 0. Stray specks appear in the bankruptcy "Number decided" band and in the district-court "Contrary to Board position" heading; I read both as scan noise, not digits or markers.