Legal Opinion
Pacific Motor Trucking Co., Plaintiff-Cross-Defendant-Appellee v. Automotive MacHinists Union, Defendant-Cross-Complainant-Appellant
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 21, 1983No. 82-4517PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Per curiam
We affirm the court’s order vacating the arbitration award.
We enforce an arbitration award if it represents a “plausible interpretation of the contract in the context of the parties’ conduct.” Holly Sugar Corp. v. Distillery, Rectifying, Wine & Allied Workers International Union, 412 F.2d 899, 903 (9th Cir. 1969). An award that conflicts directly with the contract cannot be a “plausible interpretation.” Federated Employers of Nevada, Inc. v. Teamsters Local No. 631, 600 F.2d 1263, 1265 (9th Cir.1979).
Article 7, Section 2(c) of the contract provided that the company could select Working…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Holly Sugar Corp. v. Distillery, Rectifying, Wine & Allied Workers Int'l Union, Afl-CioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Federated Employers of Nevada, Inc. v. Teamsters Local No. 631Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
3Cited by36 opinions
- George Day Construction Co., Inc. v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 354Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- United States Life Insurance v. Superior National InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Apex Fountain Sales, Inc. v. Kleinfeld, Ernie, Flo Aire, Inc., Kearney, Jr., Ralph, Kearney, Michael, Ralph Kearney & Son, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Aspic Engineering and Constr. v. Ecc Centcom Constructors LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Edward Hines Lumber Company of Oregon v. Lumber and Sawmill Workers Local No. 2588 and Central Oregon District Council, LpiwCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.