Nathanson v. National Labor Relations Board

holding that “if one claimant is to be preferred over others, the purpose should be clear from the statute” | holding that a back wage claim in favor of the NLRB was not entitled to priority over other estate creditors | stating that “if one claimant is to be preferred over others, the purpose should be clear from the statute” | explaining that a court must refuse to treat as an included debt “a claim which the United States is collecting for the benefit of a private party” | holding that the NLRB was a creditor within the meaning of the Code because it had been granted the power to enforce the National Labor Relations Act, even though a back pay award was made to individual workers, not to the Government | explaining that a court must refuse to treat as an included debt "a claim which the United States is collecting for the benefit of a private party" | explaining that courts cannot prefer one creditor over another unless specifically directed to do so; “if one claimant is to be preferred over others, the purpose should be clear from the statute.” | rejecting the argument that the government’s abiding interest in eliminating unfair labor practices warranted stretching the statute to secure a preference in payment for backpay awards | holding NLRB qualified as a creditor under the Bankruptcy Act, and had standing to pursue an action against an employer for back pay owed to its employees, stating that the NLRB was the "public agent chosen by Congress to enforce the National Labor Relations Act” | rejecting the argument that the government's abiding interest in eliminating unfair labor practices warranted stretching the statute to secure a preference in payment for backpay awards | “Section 507 is intended to be the exclusive list of priorities in bankruptcy. Priorities are to be fixed by Congress.” | “if one claimant is to be preferred over others, the purpose should be clear from the statute” | NLRB was a creditor within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act because it was the only party entitled to enforce the National Labor Relations Act | liquidation of unfair labor practice claim should have been deferred by bankruptcy court to the NLRB for it to determine the appropriate remedy | pre-Bankruptcy Code case holding that the Board, not the bankruptcy referee, possessed sole authority to adjudicate unfair labor practice charge | liquidation of unfair labor practice claim should have been deferred by bankruptcy court to the NLRB for it to determine the appropriate remedy | court should stay its hand and await an administrative decision regarding matters entrusted by Congress to the agency | “[T]he fixing of back pay is one of the functions confided solely to the Board.” | priority statutes must be read narrowly because “the overriding objective in bankruptcy cases is equal distribution of the debtor's limited resources among its creditors” | priority statutes must be read narrowly because “the overriding objective in bankruptcy cases is equal distribution of the debtor's limited resources among its creditors” | “We can find in the Bankruptcy Act no warrant for giving these back pay awards any different treatment than other wage claims enjoy” | liquidation of unfair labor practice claim should have been deferred by bankruptcy court to the NLRB for it to determine the appropriate remedy | "The theme of the Bankruptcy Act is equality of distribution; and if one claimant is to be preferred over others, the purpose should be clear from the statute." (internal quotations omitted) | “The bankruptcy court normally supervises the liquidation of claims. But the rule is not inexorable. A sound discretion may indicate that a particular controversy should be remitted to another tribunal for litigation.” | Bankruptcy Court should defer to the NLRB for resolution of unfair labor practice claims | “It is the Board, not the referee in bankruptcy nor the court, that has been entrusted by Congress with authority to determine what measures will remedy