Boys Markets Injunction

71 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• The Indep. OIL & Chem. Workers OF Quincy, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Mfg. Co.
  864 F.2d 927· 1st Cir.· 1988-12-28 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that the potential harm to union members from implementing new work rules was insufficient to justify overriding the limitations of the Norris-LaGuardia Act and granting injunctive relief pending arbitration.
• Atl. & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  534 F.2d 541· 3d Cir.· 1976-03-26 ·cited 55×
  The court held that employers are not strictly liable for employee non-compliance with specific safety standards when such non-compliance is predictable and uniform, and that the Commission has jurisdiction to consider the validity of a standard in an enforcement proceeding.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  519 F.2d 1236· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-24 ·cited 54×
  A prospective injunction against all strikes, even over arbitrable issues, is impermissible under the Norris-LaGuardia Act and Boys Markets. Disobedience of a void injunction cannot support a civil contempt finding.
• Napa Pittsburgh, Inc. v. Auto. Chauffeurs
  502 F.2d 321· 3d Cir.· 1974-08-08 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the determination of whether a picket line was primary, thus allowing employees to refuse to cross it under the collective bargaining agreement, was an arbitrable dispute, and a preliminary injunction was proper pending arbitration.
• Lever Bros. Co. v. Int'l Chem. Workers Union
  554 F.2d 115· 4th Cir.· 1976-11-30 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the dispute was arbitrable, the preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo pending arbitration was properly issued, and the injunction bond was correctly conditioned on the wrongful issuance of the injunction r
• NEW York Tel. Co. v. Commc'ns Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  445 F.2d 39· 2d Cir.· 1971-06-22 ·cited 43×
  The court should not interpret a consent order's scope without a hearing, even if its language appears unambiguous, when there's a dispute about the parties' intent.
• NEW Orleans S.S. Ass'n v. General Longshore Workers
  626 F.2d 455· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-25 ·cited 40×
  Federal courts may enforce arbitration awards holding work stoppages invalid under collective bargaining agreements, but cannot enjoin actions pending arbitration or extend awards to future cases. Such injunctions do not violate First Amendment or Thirteenth Amendment rights.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  534 F.2d 1063· 3d Cir.· 1976-03-16 ·cited 40×
  A preliminary injunction should not have been issued against the district and international unions as there was no evidence they ordered, approved, or condoned the local union's work stoppages.
• Island Creek Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  507 F.2d 650· 3d Cir.· 1975-01-14 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a dispute over employees honoring stranger picket lines is arbitrable under the contract's broad settlement of disputes provisions, justifying a preliminary injunction.
• Detroit Newspaper Publishers Ass'n v. Detroit Typographical Union NO. 18
  471 F.2d 872· 6th Cir.· 1972-12-20 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because it failed to weigh the equities between the parties and make findings of irreparable harm, which are required prerequisites under Boys Markets.
• Inland Steel Co. v. Local Union NO. 1545
  505 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1974-10-22 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the injunctions did not conflict with the Norris-LaGuardia Act, as the dispute over honoring picket lines was arbitrable.
• Amstar Corp. v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen OF N. Am., AFL-CIO
  468 F.2d 1372· 5th Cir.· 1972-11-06 ·cited 36×
  A district court cannot issue a Boys Markets injunction when the legality of the strike itself is the arbitrable dispute.
• Avco Corp. v. Local Union #787 OF the Int'l Union
  459 F.2d 968· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-05 ·cited 34×
  A district court may not decline to issue a Boys Markets injunction solely because the compulsory arbitration clause of a collective bargaining agreement is 'employee-oriented,' provided both parties are contractually bound to arbitrate.
• The N. Am. Coal Corp. v. Local Union 2262
  497 F.2d 459· 6th Cir.· 1974-05-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was invalid due to the district court's failure to consider equitable factors and irreparable harm, and that the contempt convictions against the individual officers and the local union were invalid due to procedural errors and lack
• Amalgamated Transit Union, Div. 1384 & the Amalgamated Council of Greyhound Divisions, AFL-CIO v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
  529 F.2d 1073· 9th Cir.· 1976-01-30 ·cited 31×
  A party seeking to maintain the status quo pending arbitration under § 301 of the LMRA need only show that their position in arbitration is not plainly without merit, and the bond for a preliminary injunction can include attorneys' fees.
• HOH v. Pepsico
  491 F.2d 556· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-08 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the unions failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits and unduly delayed in invoking available arbitration remedies.
• Consolidation Coal Co. v. Disabled Miners OF Southern West Virginia
  442 F.2d 1261· 4th Cir.· 1971-05-12 ·cited 30×
  The court held that preliminary injunctions must comply with procedural rules regarding notice and hearing, and that injunctions should be narrowly tailored. It also found that an association was improperly dismissed as a party.
• S. Ohio Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  551 F.2d 695· 6th Cir.· 1977-02-11 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a union's refusal to cross stranger picket lines is not an arbitrable dispute subject to injunction under Boys Markets, and that injunctions against district and international unions require more than mere notice.
• Reid Burton Constr., Inc. v. Carpenters Dist. Council OF S. Colo.
  614 F.2d 698· 10th Cir.· 1980-01-31 ·cited 27×
  The court held that defendants waived their right to arbitration due to their evasive and dilatory conduct throughout the litigation, which prejudiced the plaintiff and the court.
• JIM Walter Res., Inc. v. Int'l Union
  609 F.2d 165· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-04 ·cited 27×
  A union can be held in civil contempt for violating a temporary restraining order enjoining a strike, even if its officers made efforts to comply, and a compensatory fine can be imposed after the strike ends.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  519 F.2d 1249· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court applied the correct standard for union liability under the Taft-Hartley Act, but erred in excluding evidence of past strikes and in not fully developing the agency status of striking committeemen.
• Republic Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  570 F.2d 467· 3d Cir.· 1978-02-02 ·cited 24×
  An international union may be liable for damages if it fails to use reasonable efforts to halt illegal wildcat strikes by its members, especially when the underlying dispute is subject to arbitration.
• United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  530 F.2d 266· 3d Cir.· 1976-01-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while the company committed an initial unfair labor practice, its subsequent actions (rescinding the contract, terminating employees) were not justified because it failed to pursue available dispute resolution mechanisms like arbitration. The Board's order is
• CF&I Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  507 F.2d 170· 10th Cir.· 1974-12-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the injunction against the union was not vague or overbroad, and was properly issued to prevent future strikes over arbitrable grievances during the life of the collective bargaining agreement.
• OLD BEN Coal Corp. v. Local Union NO. 1487 OF United Mine Workers OF Am.
  500 F.2d 950· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a permanent injunction against work stoppages is justified when a union repeatedly violates its contractual duty to arbitrate, and the injunction's breadth is appropriate to enforce that duty.
• OLD BEN Coal Corp. v. Local Union NO. 1487 OF United Mine Workers OF Am.
  457 F.2d 162· 7th Cir.· 1972-03-16 ·cited 22×
  A collective bargaining agreement's mandatory arbitration provision implies a no-strike obligation, allowing for injunctive relief, but the scope of such injunctions must be narrowly tailored to the specific dispute.
• Drivers v. Akers Motor Lines, Inc.
  582 F.2d 1336· 4th Cir.· 1978-09-19 ·cited 21×
  A federal court may enjoin an employer from further encumbering capital assets pending arbitration of union grievances, even during business liquidation, if the arbitration award could not otherwise restore the status quo.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  548 F.2d 67· 3d Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 20×
  A sympathy strike does not violate a labor contract that contains mandatory arbitration but no express 'no strike' clause.
• Armco Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  505 F.2d 1129· 4th Cir.· 1974-11-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a work stoppage over refusal to cross a picket line is an arbitrable dispute under a collective bargaining agreement with a mandatory arbitration clause, allowing for injunctive relief under Boys Markets. The court also held that Armco's antitrust claim was pr
• McGUIRE Shaft & Tunnel Corp. v. Local Union NO. 1791
  475 F.2d 1209· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-02-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that preliminary injunctions were authorized under the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, and that the Norris-LaGuardia Act did not prohibit such injunctions against labor unions in this context.
• Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. v. United Steelworkers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  633 F.2d 302· 3d Cir.· 1980-08-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that injunctive relief against the International Union was improper without findings of necessity or helpfulness, and the injunction against the Local Union was overbroad and insufficiently specific. The contempt order against the Local was also improper due to lac
• United States v. Partin
  524 F.2d 992· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-12 ·cited 18×
  A contemnor of a Boys Markets injunction does not have a constitutional or statutory right to a jury trial, even if the underlying statute is § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.
• Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Local 5, Indus. Union OF Marine & Shipbuilding Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  469 F.2d 848· 1st Cir.· 1972-11-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that federal courts have power to enforce an arbitrator's cease and desist order against a work stoppage, and that the issue of whether a party repudiated the arbitration agreement is for the arbitrator to decide.
• Int'l Union v. LaSALLE Mach. Tool, Inc.
  696 F.2d 452· 6th Cir.· 1982-12-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in issuing a preliminary injunction without complying with the procedural requirements of the Norris-LaGuardia Act, specifically failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on disputed facts and make required findings.
• Jacksonville Mar. Ass'n, Inc. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n
  571 F.2d 319· 5th Cir.· 1978-04-17 ·cited 16×
  The employer must allege and prove willingness to arbitrate and resort to contractual arbitration machinery as a prerequisite to a Boys Markets injunction.
• The Celotex Corp. v. Oil, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union, Afl-Cio
  516 F.2d 242· 3d Cir.· 1975-05-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that procedural deficiencies in issuing a temporary restraining order do not automatically entitle a party to damages under the Norris-LaGuardia Act if those deficiencies caused no actual harm or expense.
• Parade Publ'ns, Inc. v. Philadelphia Mailers Union NO. 14
  459 F.2d 369· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-01 ·cited 16×
  A district court cannot enjoin a strike without first determining that the strike is over a grievance which both parties are contractually bound to arbitrate.
• The DOW Chem. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  636 F.2d 1352· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 14×
  The dissent argues that the Board should have considered whether contract termination was justified after the company failed to exhaust grievance procedures or court options, even with an illegal strike.
• Associated Gen. Contractors OF Minn. v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs Twin City Local NO. 49
  519 F.2d 269· 8th Cir.· 1975-07-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a work stoppage due to a sympathy strike is an arbitrable dispute under collective bargaining agreements containing no-strike clauses and arbitration provisions, and an injunction pending arbitration is appropriate under Boys Markets if equitable prerequisites
• The Morning Tel. v. Bertram A. Powers
  450 F.2d 97· 2d Cir.· 1971-10-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the orders denying the union's motion to dissolve the temporary restraining order were effectively preliminary injunctions and thus appealable. The court reversed the orders granting injunctive relief and affirmed the order denying jurisdiction.
• Nursing Home & Hosp. Union NO. 434 Afl-Cio-Ldiu v. SKY VUE Terrace, Inc.
  759 F.2d 1094· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that an injunction preventing a business from distributing its assets pending arbitration is permissible under federal labor law to ensure the arbitration process is not frustrated.
• Pittsburgh Newspaper Printing Pressmen's Union NO. 9 v. Pittsburgh Press Co.
  479 F.2d 607· 3d Cir.· 1973-05-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying preliminary injunctions because the unions failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable harm.
• Int'l Union United Auto. v. Lester Eng'g Co. & Nesco, Inc.
  718 F.2d 818· 6th Cir.· 1983-10-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the union's request for a preliminary injunction because the decision to close the plant was not an arbitrable dispute under the collective bargaining agreement.
• Layne-Western Co., Inc. v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs, AFL-CIO
  650 F.2d 155· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the interpretation of which contributions are due under the collective bargaining agreement is an arbitrable issue, but the determination of delinquency based on those contributions is for the trustees. The court also held that the issuance of a preliminary in
• Campbell "66" Express, Inc. v. Rundel
  597 F.2d 125· 8th Cir.· 1979-04-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against picketing that sought to circumvent a final and binding arbitration decision regarding an employee's discharge.
• Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  557 F.2d 1263· 9th Cir.· 1977-04-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an arbitrator's award prohibiting picketing, based on a broad no-strike clause in a project labor agreement, is enforceable via injunction, even if the underlying dispute is not directly arbitrable, and the arbitrator has the authority to interpret the scope o
• Donovan Constr. Co. OF Minn. v. Construction
  533 F.2d 481· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while a Boys Markets injunction was appropriate to enforce a no-strike clause over a jurisdictional dispute, its scope was overly broad and not supported by sufficient evidence of future irreparable harm.
• Valmac Indus., Inc. v. Food Handlers Local 425 OF the Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen OF N. Am., AFL-CIO
  519 F.2d 263· 8th Cir.· 1975-07-29 ·cited 8×
  A Boys Markets injunction may be issued when a work stoppage occurs because employees honored a union picket line, provided the dispute over whether honoring the picket line violated the no-strike clause is arbitrable and the injunction is conditioned upon prompt arbitration.
• Certified Grocers OF Ill., Inc. v. Produce
  816 F.2d 329· 7th Cir.· 1987-04-10 ·cited 6×
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the injunction expired by its own terms and the subsequent permanent injunction was not timely appealed.
• Boston & Me. Corp. v. R.M. Lenfest, Jr.
  799 F.2d 795· 1st Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 6×
  A union may call a concerted work stoppage under FRSA § 10(b) when hazardous working conditions result from a system-wide failure to provide adequate protection, and the district court lacked jurisdiction to determine compliance with notice provisions, which must be resolved by t