Legal Opinion
ARO, Inc. v. International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided February 19, 1976No. CIV-4-75-38PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
NEESE, District Judge.
This is an action to vacate or modify an arbitration award made pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement of the parties. 29 U.S.C. § 185. The defendants moved for a partial summary judgment and the plaintiff moved for a summary judgment. Rules 56(a), (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The parties stipulated that the action may be disposed of by the *174Court upon their respective motions for a summary judgment. At the plaintiff’s request, local Rule 12(c), an oral hearing was held on February 2, 1976, after which the Court took the motions under…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen and Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Clinchfield Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1969
- Order of Railway Conductors & Brakemen v. Clinchfield RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1967
3Cited by2 opinions
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Brotherhood of TeamstersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Foreman Roofing Inc. v. United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers & Allied Workers, Local 36California Court of Appeal · 1983