Hanna Mining Co. v. District 2, Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass'n
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
The gist of plaintiffs’ claim, upon the merits, appears tó be that MEBA’s picketing, although nonviolent, is for an unlawful purpose, and plaintiffs are therefore entitled to an injunction. Allegedly, MEBA is attempting to coerce plaintiffs to bargain with MEBA as the representative of'the marine engineers, against the wishes of a majority of the latter. The picketing is allegedly intended to induce others to refuse to perform essential services for plaintiffs’ vessels, in order to present plaintiffs with the choice between suffering substantial loss and unlawfully bargaining with MEBA. Under…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Liner v. Jafco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Guss v. Utah Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Youngdahl v. Rainfair, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 695 v. Vogt, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hanna Mining Co. v. District 2, Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Klotz v. WathenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Hanna Mining Co. v. District 2, Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1965