Legal Opinion
Bey v. Muldoon
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 9, 1963No. Civ. A. No. 30789PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOSEPH S. LORD, III, District •Judge.
This action involves a claim by certain longshoremen to a fund created pursuant to the collective bargaining contract between their union, I.L.A. Local 1291, and an employer association, Philadelphia Marine Trade Association (P. M.T.A.). Plaintiffs, sugarworkers, •claim that although the intention of the collective bargaining agreement was that the fund was to be used to compensate them for lost employment opportunities due to technological improvements in the handling of bulk sugar, the fund has been diverted and is now to be used to benefit all…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Smith v. Evening News Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Charles Dowd Box Co. v. CourtneySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Alvares v. EricksonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Alvares v. EricksonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Bey v. MuldoonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1963
- Thomas v. Penn Supply & Metal Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- Chasis v. Progress Manufacturing Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.