Legal Opinion
Rosemarie Denicola v. G. C. Murphy Company, Appellee-Cross and General Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers, Local Union 249, Appellant-Cross
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided November 9, 1977No. 76-1866, 76-2116PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
BIGGS, Circuit Judge.
I. FACTS
The case at bar began as a class action brought by 29 named plaintiffs against their employer, the G. C. Murphy Company (Murphy) and their local union, General Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers, Local Union No. 249 (Local 249). The complaint, brought on behalf on all female employees of Murphy’s McKeesport, Pennsylvania, warehouse who were members of Local 249, alleged that Murphy and Local 249 violated Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., by maintaining under a 1968 collective bargaining agreement…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Richards v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Mitchell v. Robert DeMario Jewelry, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United States v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Bowe v. Judson C. Burns, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Transport Workers UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Glus v. G. C. Murphy Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Shields, Arnett L. v. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Bethlehem Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Glus v. G. C. Murphy Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Poleto v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.