Kerkemeyer v. Midkiff
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Dissent
RUARK, Judge.
I dissent.
First, considering the question from the standpoint of contract, I believe the rule (made by the union long after the execution of the contracts) which required the proprietor to join the union and thereby become subject to its discipline so that it had, in practical effect, the power to nullify any contract between the parties, was one which was not within the reasonable contemplation of the parties and therefore not “reasonable.”
Exhibit A, the contract, covered the field in respect to employment, wages and working conditions relative to the affairs then involved. It…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Bird v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. HankeSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Louis K. Liggett Co. v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Paisley v. LucasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1940
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.