Norris-Laguardia Act

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

• W. Gulf Mar. Ass'n v. ILA Deep SEA Local 24
  751 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the union's motion to dismiss the Texas action, as a prior-filed action in New York presented the same core issues regarding the validity of an arbitration award.
• The Atchison v. The United Transp. Union
  734 F.2d 317· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the dispute between the UTU and Santa Fe was a minor dispute under the Railway Labor Act, and therefore the threatened strike was unlawful and properly enjoined.
• Local 553, Transp. Workers Union OF Am., AFL-CIO v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  695 F.2d 668· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court acted within its discretion in granting preliminary injunctive relief, but modified the form of the injunction. It found that section 7 of the Norris-LaGuardia Act did not bar relief in a major dispute under the RLA, but section 8 did not co
• Local Div. 732 v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth.
  667 F.2d 1327· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-29 ·cited 24×
  The panel majority incorrectly held that federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction over suits to enforce labor protective agreements under section 13(c) of the Urban Mass Transit Act.
• 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.
• Truck Drivers Local Union NO. 807 v. The Bohack Corp.
  541 F.2d 312· 2d Cir.· 1976-08-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue an injunction against the union's picketing without ordering the employer to arbitrate, and that bankruptcy court approval is required for arbitration of disputes under a collective bargaining agreement.
• 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
• The Chief Freight Lines Co. v. Local Union NO. 886 & S. Area Conf. of Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters
  514 F.2d 572· 10th Cir.· 1975-04-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an injunction enforcing a no-strike provision while simultaneously staying arbitration is improper under the Boys Markets exception, as the employer's obligation to arbitrate is a condition for such an injunction.
• A. H. Bull S.S. Co. v. Seafarers' Int'l Union OF N. Am., Atl. & Gulf Dist., AFL-CIO
  250 F.2d 326· 2d Cir.· 1957-11-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that Section 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act did not repeal the Norris-LaGuardia Act, and therefore federal courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin peaceful strikes in labor disputes.
• Milk & ICE Cream Drivers & Dairy Emps. Union v. Gillespie Milk Prods. Corp.
  203 F.2d 650· 6th Cir.· 1953-04-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Labor Management Relations Act authorizes injunctive relief for enforcement of collective bargaining agreements, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not prohibit such relief in this context.
• Trans Int'l Airlines, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  650 F.2d 949· 9th Cir.· 1980-02-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act's anti-injunction policy should yield to the Railway Labor Act's (RLA) policy of avoiding disruption of commerce, particularly when a union breaches its duty to maintain agreements.
• Nat'l Airlines v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers
  416 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-23 ·cited 23×
  The court held that while the carrier's resort to self-help was justified due to an unmanageable wildcat strike, the mass discharge of strikers exceeded permissible bounds; reinstatement rights depend on whether strikers were replaced.
• Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. Donnelly Garment Co.
  147 F.2d 246· 8th Cir.· 1945-01-19 ·cited 23×
  Recovery for damages caused by erroneous injunctive orders is limited by the amount stipulated in the injunction bonds, not by the broader provisions of the Norris-LaGuardia Act, when the bonds were not issued pursuant to that Act.
• The Int'l Ass'n of MacHinists v. State
  153 Fla. 672· Fla.· 1943-11-10 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decree ordering a shipbuilding company to cancel the 'closed shop' clause of its collective bargaining agreement with labor unions. The court held that state courts lack authority to interfere with labor contracts approved by the
• Rodonich v. House Wreckers Union Local 95 OF Laborers' Int'l Union
  817 F.2d 967· 2d Cir.· 1987-04-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an international union can be liable for affirming a local's unlawful discipline if it had full knowledge that the discipline was part of a scheme to suppress dissent, but found no such knowledge here for most plaintiffs. However, the court reversed the dismis
• Scott v. Moore
  640 F.2d 708· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not divest federal courts of jurisdiction to enjoin violent acts, even in a labor dispute, and that 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) provides a remedy for private conspiracies motivated by nonracial, class-based animus that deprive individuals
• Japan AIR Lines Co., Ltd. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers
  538 F.2d 46· 2d Cir.· 1976-07-14 ·cited 22×
  The appeal from the temporary restraining order is moot due to its expiration, and the declaratory judgment that the Union's scope proposal is not a mandatory subject of bargaining under the RLA is affirmed.
• Drywall Tapers AND Pointers OF Greater NEW York v. Operative Plasterers' & Cement Masons' Int'l Ass'n OF the United States & Canada
  537 F.2d 669· 2d Cir.· 1976-06-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the 1961 Memorandum between the unions falls within § 301(a) of the LMRA, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not preclude injunctive relief for its breach, affirming the preliminary injunction as modified.
• 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.
• Pac. Mar. Ass'n v. Int'l Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union
  454 F.2d 262· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not bar injunctive relief to enforce a union's obligation to arbitrate, and the jurisdictional issue is not moot despite contract expiration.
• Ramsey v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  416 F.2d 655· 6th Cir.· 1969-09-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that Section 6 of the Norris-LaGuardia Act's 'clear proof' standard applies only to proving the authority of officers, members, or agents to act for a labor union, not to all elements of an antitrust violation claim against a union. The standard for proving antitru
• Carroll v. Am. Fed'n OF Musicians OF the United States & Canada
  372 F.2d 155· 2d Cir.· 1967-01-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that certain union rules setting minimum fees for musicians acting as leaders, including extra charges for leading other musicians, are protected union activities and do not violate antitrust laws.
• Nat'l Mar. Union OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  342 F.2d 538· 2d Cir.· 1965-03-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board correctly found that the union's picketing, which induced secondary employees to refuse services and coerced neutral employers, violated Section 8(b)(4)(i)(ii)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, even though the ultimate
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp.
  283 F.2d 26· 1st Cir.· 1960-10-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board cannot obtain broad injunctions against respondents based on a single offense or by consent stipulation alone, without a factual record supporting such breadth.
• Butte v. Brotherhood OF Locomotive Firemen AND Enginemen
  268 F.2d 54· 9th Cir.· 1959-05-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a dispute initiated by a carrier's Section 6 notice, even if the carrier later withdraws the notice and its parent company takes over the work, remains a major dispute under the Railway Labor Act if the parent's action is deemed the carrier's act, and injuncti
• Am. Med. Ass'n v. United States
  D.D.C.· 1942-06-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the practice of medicine and hospital services constitute trade or commerce under the Sherman Act, and professional groups cannot use criminal methods to prevent changes or destroy competing institutions.
• Green v. Obergfell
  121 F.2d 46· D.C. Cir.· 1941-03-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to issue an injunction because the case involved a labor dispute under the Norris-LaGuardia Act and the court failed to comply with the Act's procedural requirements.
• Chicago & N. W. Transp. Co. v. Ry. Labor Executives Ass'n
  855 F.2d 1277· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the dispute over the sale of a rail line and its impact on employees is a 'minor dispute' under the Railway Labor Act, subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, and thus a strike over it can be enjoined.
• Cent. States Se. & Sw. Areas Pension Fund v. T.I.M.E.-DC, Inc.
  826 F.2d 320· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-24 ·cited 21×
• Mesa Verde Constr. Co. v. N. Cal. Dist. Council OF Laborers
  820 F.2d 1006· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a construction company's pre-hire agreements could be repudiated for future projects if the company hired employees on a job-by-job basis, and that the district court had jurisdiction to determine such repudiation.
• Madelon J. Aguirre v. Auto. Teamsters
  633 F.2d 168· 9th Cir.· 1980-11-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the Norris-La Guardia Act's stringent agency standard is inappropriate for suits brought under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), and that claims under the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) should have been considered.
• 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 v. United Steelworkers OF Am.
  271 F.2d 676· 3d Cir.· 1959-10-27 ·cited 21×
• Bowe v. Judson C. Burns, Inc.
  137 F.2d 37· 3d Cir.· 1943-05-06 ·cited 21×
  The court held that while the Fair Labor Standards Act's prohibition against retaliation applies to unions, the right to seek injunctive relief under Section 17 is exclusively vested in the Administrator, not individual employees.
• United States Steel Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  711 F.2d 772· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-30 ·cited 20×
  A broad no-strike clause, independent of an arbitration clause and supported by evidence of the parties' intent to ensure uninterrupted operations for competitive reasons, constitutes a clear waiver of an employee's right to engage in a sympathy strike.
• United Steelworkers OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Bishop
  598 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-06 ·cited 20×
  The federal court lacked jurisdiction to issue an injunction in a replevin action that grew out of a labor dispute, as prohibited by the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
• 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.
• 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.
• Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. The AIR Line Pilots Ass'n
  442 F.2d 251· 8th Cir.· 1971-04-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that despite a strike settlement, the prior order compelling arbitration of a labor dispute should stand due to the importance of the issue and the likelihood of recurrence, but dissolved the injunction due to changed circumstances.
• Ford v. Boeger
  362 F.2d 999· 8th Cir.· 1966-07-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that petitioners failed to establish that the district court erred in denying their petitions for federal habeas corpus relief, affirming the dismissals.
• Int'l Org. OF Masters v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  351 F.2d 771· D.C. Cir.· 1965-06-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots (MMP) is a labor organization under the Act, and its Local 47, acting as its agent, engaged in an illegal secondary boycott.
• Nat'l Marine Eng'rs Beneficial Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  274 F.2d 167· 2d Cir.· 1960-01-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that unions composed of employees, even if acting on behalf of supervisors, can be considered 'labor organizations' under the NLRA and held liable for unfair labor practices. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the Board's determination that MEBA an
• Gen. Comm. of Adjustment v. CSX R.R. Corp.
  893 F.2d 584· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-05 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the dispute over the sale of a rail line was a "minor" dispute under the Railway Labor Act because it was arguable that existing agreements and past practices could resolve the issue, thus requiring arbitration by the National Railroad Adjustment Board.
• Benz v. Compania Naviera Hidalgo, S.A.
  205 F.2d 944· 9th Cir.· 1953-06-30 ·cited 19×
  In the absence of a posted bond or security, damages cannot be recovered for the wrongful issuance of a temporary injunction, even if granted without just cause.
• Korthinos v. The Niarchos
  175 F.2d 730· 4th Cir.· 1949-05-17 ·cited 19×
  The court held that admiralty courts have the power to remove striking seamen and that advances violating 46 U.S.C.A. § 599 cannot be credited against wages, but delay in resolving such claims does not automatically trigger double wage penalties.
• Camping Constr. Co. v. Dist. Council OF Iron Workers
  915 F.2d 1333· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that while termination disputes under a prehire agreement are arbitrable, claims of repudiation of such agreements must be decided by a court, not an arbitrator. Furthermore, the Norris-LaGuardia Act restricts a court's power to issue injunctions staying labor arbi
• Mo. Pac. R.R. Co. & Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. Co. v. United Transp. Union
  782 F.2d 107· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a threatened strike over crew selection for trackage rights operations, which had been decided by the ICC, was enjoinable even if considered a major dispute, because the ICC's exemption under 49 U.S.C. § 11341(a) displaced the Railway Labor Act's negotiation r
• Maram v. Universidad Interamericana de Puerto RICO, Inc.
  722 F.2d 953· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the National Labor Relations Board's application for a preliminary injunction, finding reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and that an injunction was just and proper.