Legal Opinion
Aarsvold v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided May 28, 1982No. Civ. 4-81-903PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MacLAUGHLIN, District Judge.
This action involves a claim for a breach of a collective bargaining agreement. The plaintiffs were employed by defendant Greyhound Lines at the time of the event which led to this lawsuit. The plaintiffs were members of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) and Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1150 (Division 1150). ATU had negotiated a collective bargaining agreement with Greyhound which was due to expire on October 31, 1980. The agreement was extended in the course of negotiations for a new agreement, but the extension would terminate upon a 24-hour strike…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Hines v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United Parcel Service, Inc. v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
3Cited by5 opinions
- Obed Aarsvold v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. Amalgamated Transit Union and Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1150Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1984
- Collins v. American Freight System, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1983
- Hunt v. Missouri Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1983
- Sundquist v. AMERICAN HOIST AND DERRICK, INC.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1982
- Bandelier v. Local 782, Retail Store Employees UnionDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1983