United Steelworkers of America v. Jarl Extrusions, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
NEESE, District Judge.
It appearing from the complaint herein that the plaintiff is a unit through which employees of the corporate defendant bargained collectively with such defendant, and that the plaintiff undertook to sue the defendants as the representative party of a class of approximately 85 employees, Rule 23(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; it further appearing by reasonable inference that each of such employees is a resident of this jurisdiction and is represented by the plaintiff; and it appearing finally that the aforementioned class is not so numerous that joinder of all…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Smith v. Evening News Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- William E. Arnold Co. v. Carpenters District CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Holden Brown, George House and George Wolff v. Sterling Aluminum Products Corporation, a Missouri CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Mays v. Tennessee Valley AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2011
- Printing Specialties & Paper Products District Council No. 2 v. International Printing & Graphic Communications UnionDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1978
- United Steelworkers of America Local 8024 v. Jarl Extrusions, IncCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
- Independent School District 89 v. Bolain Equipment, Inc.District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1980
- Kohntopp v. ButcherDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.