Norris-Laguardia Act

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

• United States v. Martinez
  686 F.2d 334· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the convictions of four PATCO officers for criminal contempt must stand, but the convictions of two others could not be supported by the record. The court also rejected several procedural and constitutional challenges to the convictions.
• H. A. Artists & Assocs., Inc. v. Actors' Equity Assn.
  451 U.S. 704· U.S.· 1981-05-26 ·cited 18×
  The franchise fee is a permissible component of the exempt regulatory system and is not an antitrust violation.
• 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
• The Drummond Co. v. Dist. 20
  598 F.2d 381· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-05 ·cited 18×
  Contempt adjudications imposing unconditional fines are appealable final orders, but the injunction was improperly applied to work stoppages remote in time from the original dispute.
• 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.
• Seaboard World Airlines, Inc. v. Transp. Workers Union OF Am., AFL-CIO
  425 F.2d 1086· 2d Cir.· 1970-03-23 ·cited 18×
  A federal court may enjoin a strike prohibited by an airline collective bargaining agreement until the legality of the prohibition can be determined by the court, distinguishing this from cases solely governed by the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
• Piedmont Aviation, Inc. v. AIR Line Pilots Ass'n
  416 F.2d 633· 4th Cir.· 1969-09-29 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the interlocutory injunction against the pilot strike, provided the status quo is maintained, and remanded for determination of whether the dispute is major or minor.
• Brotherhood OF Locomotive Firemen AND Enginemen v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  346 F.2d 673· 5th Cir.· 1965-06-08 ·cited 18×
  The Norris-LaGuardia Act bars federal courts from enjoining employees from refusing to cross a picket line during a labor dispute, and this prohibition is not superseded by the Railway Labor Act in this context.
• Local 450, Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs, AFL-CIO v. Elliott
  256 F.2d 630· 5th Cir.· 1958-06-24 ·cited 18×
  A Section 10(k) determination is not a prerequisite for a Section 10(l) injunction in jurisdictional disputes, and the court found reasonable cause to believe the union engaged in unfair labor practices constituting both a jurisdictional dispute and a secondary boycott.
• Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Brown
  252 F.2d 149· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-24 ·cited 18×
  A federal court has jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim that employees fomented a strike before or during the processing of minor grievances under the Railway Labor Act, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not shield individuals engaging in such an illegal strike if their labor orga
• Ballantyne v. United States
  237 F.2d 657· 5th Cir.· 1956-10-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appellant was entitled to a jury trial for contempt charges that also constituted criminal offenses.
• Local 19 v. The Buckeye Cotton OIL Co.
  236 F.2d 776· 6th Cir.· 1956-08-22 ·cited 18×
  A federal court has jurisdiction under Section 301 of the LMRA and the U.S. Arbitration Act to order specific performance of an arbitration clause in a collective bargaining agreement, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not prohibit such injunctive relief.
• W. L. Mead, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  217 F.2d 6· 1st Cir.· 1954-11-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act prohibits federal courts from issuing injunctions against peaceful strikes and picketing, even when such actions violate a collective bargaining agreement under the Labor Management Relations Act.
• In re Third AVE. Transit Corp. v. Quill
  192 F.2d 971· 2d Cir.· 1951-12-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the reorganization court lacked jurisdiction to issue an injunction against a labor dispute under the Norris-La Guardia Act, and therefore erred in denying the motion to vacate the injunction.
• Cal. Ass'n of Emp'rs v. Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council of Reno
  178 F.2d 175· 9th Cir.· 1949-11-28 ·cited 18×
• Donnelly Garment Co. v. Dubinsky
  154 F.2d 38· 8th Cir.· 1946-03-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to issue injunctions in labor disputes without specific findings required by the Norris-LaGuardia Act, including proof that public officers are unable or unwilling to provide adequate protection.
• Service v. Commercial Prop. Servs., Inc.
  755 F.2d 499· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-21 ·cited 17×
  A non-signatory to a collective bargaining agreement cannot be compelled to arbitrate unless it is found to be an alter ego of a signatory, a single employer, or the corporate veil can be pierced. Federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction over non-signatories to collective
• Larry v. Muko, Inc.
  609 F.2d 1368· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-20 ·cited 17×
  The court held that union activity can be subject to antitrust scrutiny if it directly restrains the business market with anticompetitive effects beyond wage/working condition competition.
• Connell Constr. Co., Inc. v. Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union NO. 100
  483 F.2d 1154· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-22 ·cited 17×
• Chicago Typographical Union No. 16 v. Chicago Sun-Times
  935 F.2d 1501· 7th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a union's challenge to an arbitrator's award based on the award being an unreasonable interpretation of the contract is frivolous, and that a dispute over a proposed contract change, not yet implemented, is not ripe for arbitration.
• John Morrell & Co. v. Local Union 304A OF the United Food & Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO
  913 F.2d 544· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a no-strike clause limited to disputes subject to the contract's peaceful settlement procedures does not clearly and unmistakably waive the right to engage in sympathy strikes.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. P*I*E Nationwide, Inc.
  894 F.2d 887· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-30 ·cited 16×
  A court of appeals may exercise equitable discretion when asked to enforce a National Labor Relations Board order, but equitable defenses like laches require unreasonable delay and resulting harm, which were not present here.
• Burlington N. R.R. Co. v. United Transp. Union
  848 F.2d 856· 8th Cir.· 1988-05-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act prohibits enjoining the strike, and the Railway Labor Act's major dispute procedures are superseded by the Interstate Commerce Act in this instance.
• Burlington N. R.R. Co. v. Brotherhood OF Maintenance OF WAY Employees
  793 F.2d 795· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 16×
  The Railway Labor Act does not prohibit secondary picketing by railroad unions, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act prohibits federal courts from enjoining such peaceful picketing.
• Cent. Vt. Ry., Inc. v. Brotherhood OF Maintenance OF WAY Employees
  793 F.2d 1298· D.C. Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 16×
  The Norris-LaGuardia Act divests federal courts of jurisdiction to enjoin secondary picketing in labor disputes, and this prohibition is not overcome by the Railway Labor Act's dispute resolution mechanisms when they do not apply to such secondary disputes.
• Am. Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO v. United States Postal Serv.
  766 F.2d 715· 2d Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction, it abused its discretion by issuing a preliminary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or that the injunction was necessary to aid the arbitration process.
• 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.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Keller-Crescent Co.
  538 F.2d 1291· 7th Cir.· 1976-08-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the dispute over the interpretation of the picket-line clause was arbitrable, and therefore the employees' refusal to cross the picket line was not protected activity under the Act.
• Fed. Prescription Serv., Inc. v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen OF N. Am.
  527 F.2d 269· 8th Cir.· 1975-12-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the International Union was not liable for the local union's unlawful acts due to a lack of 'clear proof' of authorization or ratification, but affirmed the compensatory damages award against the local union.
• 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.
• Henderson v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs
  420 F.2d 802· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-11 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a union's picketing activity to force an employer to reassign work, even temporarily, constitutes an unfair labor practice under Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the NLRA, and the "unclean hands" defense is not applicable against the NLRB seeking injunctive relief.
• PAN Am. World Airways, Inc. v. United Bhd. OF Carpenters & Joiners OF Am.
  324 F.2d 217· 9th Cir.· 1963-11-05 ·cited 16×
  The Railway Labor Act does not apply to employees of an air carrier whose work has no relation to air transportation.
• Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists, AFL-CIO v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
  304 F.2d 206· 8th Cir.· 1962-06-19 ·cited 16×
  A federal court lacks jurisdiction to grant an injunction in a minor labor dispute under the Railway Labor Act if the plaintiff has not exhausted available administrative remedies, as such injunctions are barred by the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
• Elgin v. Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen
  302 F.2d 540· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a strike over pension disputes was not illegal and that the Norris-LaGuardia Act barred injunctive relief, affirming the district court's dismissal and denial of an injunction.
• Gulf Coast Shrimpers & Oystermans Ass'n v. United States
  236 F.2d 658· 5th Cir.· 1956-09-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support jury verdicts finding appellants guilty of violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and that the indictment and jury instructions were not fatally flawed.
• United States v. Kemble
  198 F.2d 889· 3d Cir.· 1952-09-04 ·cited 16×
  The dissent argues that the Hobbs Act does not apply to a labor union's attempt to secure employment for its members, even if violence is involved, as this constitutes a legitimate labor objective and not extortion.
• Amalgamated Ass'n of St. v. Dixie Motor Coach Corp.
  170 F.2d 902· 8th Cir.· 1948-11-26 ·cited 16×
  Federal district courts lack jurisdiction to issue injunctions at the instance of private parties in cases involving or growing out of labor disputes, even if those acts constitute violations of Section 303(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947.
• Allen Bradley Co. v. Local Union NO. 3
  145 F.2d 215· 2d Cir.· 1944-10-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the injunction was too broad, but dissented from the dismissal of the complaint and denial of declaratory judgment.
• Lumber Prods. Ass'n, Inc. v. United States
  144 F.2d 546· 9th Cir.· 1944-08-23 ·cited 16×
  A combination of labor unions and employers to restrain interstate commerce by preventing the sale of out-of-state goods and fixing local prices is not protected by labor laws and violates the Sherman Act. However, individuals who provided testimony that tended to incriminate the
• Carter v. Herrin Motor Freight Lines, Inc.
  131 F.2d 557· 5th Cir.· 1942-11-10 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the injunction was improperly granted because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate compliance with the Norris-LaGuardia Act's requirements regarding reasonable efforts to settle the labor dispute and the inability or unwillingness of local authorities to provid
• LEE WAY Motor Freight, Inc. v. Keystone Freight Lines, Inc.
  126 F.2d 931· 10th Cir.· 1942-03-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act deprives federal courts of jurisdiction to issue injunctions in cases involving labor disputes, even if a common carrier's duties are implicated.
• Aluminum Workers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO v. Consol. Aluminum Corp.
  696 F.2d 437· 6th Cir.· 1982-12-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the union failed to demonstrate irreparable harm necessary to justify an injunction against the employer's job reclassification, and that the order to arbitrate was unnecessary as the employer was willing to arbitrate.
• United States v. Union Nacional de Trabajadores
  576 F.2d 388· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-23 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the criminal contempt convictions of the Union and its Secretary-Treasurer, and that claims regarding wiretapping and selective prosecution were without merit.
• Philadelphia Marine Trade Ass'n v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n
  365 F.2d 295· 3d Cir.· 1966-08-11 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act to enforce an arbitration award, and that the union's refusal to comply constituted a breach of the collective bargaining agreement.
• Ry. Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R.R. Co.
  831 F.2d 1231· 3d Cir.· 1987-10-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enjoin the strike under section 4 of the Norris-LaGuardia Act, as the Interstate Commerce Act does not override the Act's anti-injunction provisions.
• Consol. Rail Corp. v. Brotherhood OF Maintenance OF WAY Employees
  792 F.2d 303· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a union is not obligated to exhaust the Railroad Labor Act negotiation procedures with a secondary employer before picketing.
• In re Petrusch v. Teamsters Local 317
  667 F.2d 297· 2d Cir.· 1981-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The Bankruptcy Court was without subject matter jurisdiction to issue an injunction restraining picketing in a labor dispute because the Norris-La Guardia Act expressly prohibits such injunctions by any United States court.
• Jou-Jou Designs, Inc. v. Int'l Ladies Garment Workers Union, AFL-CIO
  643 F.2d 905· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the Sherman Act and that the federal courts lacked jurisdiction to enjoin the AFL-CIO arbitration, affirming the dismissal of the complaint.