Legal Opinion
Wright-Austin Co. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided November 22, 1976No. Civ. A. 76-71533PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
KEITH, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff, the Wright-Austin Company, has brought this action pursuant to Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, Title 29 U.S.C. Section 185, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, Title 28 U.S.C. Section 2201, seeking a declaratory judgment as to all defendants that the Opinion and Award of Arbitrator Alan Walt, entered on June 22, 1976, in the Matter of the Separation of Joseph Barrow, is null, void and of no effect as a result of Arbitrator Walt having exceeded his authority in entering this Award. The defendants, International Union,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Truck Drivers & Helpers Union Local 784 v. Ulry-Talbert Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1964
- The Timken Company v. Local Union No. 1123, United Steelworkers of America, Afl-CioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1973
- Amanda Bent Bolt Company, Amanda, Ohio v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 1549Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1971
- Magnavox Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine WorkersDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Raff v. MaggioDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1990
- Chemineer v. Local Lodge 225, Intern. Ass'n of MacH.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1983
- Hunt v. Mobil Oil Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1984