Legal Opinion

Celotex Corp. v. United Steelworkers of America

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 17, 1974No. Civ. A. 70-1841PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BECHTLE, District Judge.

The Celotex Corporation (“Celotex”) commenced this action under § 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, against the International Union of District 50, Allied Technical Workers of the United States and Canada (“International”) and Local 12829 (“Local”), to recover damages sustained as a result of the breach of a no-strike clause contained in the collective bargaining agreement entered into by the above-captioned parties. 1 The case proceeded to a bifurcated trial before a jury of eight. After the International and the Local were both found…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Twin City Plaza, Inc. v. Central Surety And Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1969
  3. Lux Art Van Service, Inc., a California Corporation v. Art PollardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
  4. Eazor Express, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Eberle Tanning Company v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1972

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. RingCentral, Inc. v. Nextiva, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API