Legal Opinion
Kincaid-Webber Motor Co. v. Quinn
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided July 9, 1951No. 42256PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WESTIIUES, C.
Plaintiff instituted this action to enjoin defendants from picketing plaintifPs place of business. Plaintiff’s theory is that the picketing was for an unlawful purpose, that is, coercing plaintiff to recognize a labor organization as the bargaining representative when, in fact, recognition would have been unlawful because plaintiff’s employees had by a vote rejected the offer of such representation.
Defendants’ theory is that the picketing was not for an unlawful purpose and that a state court has no jurisdiction of the subject matter; that jurisdiction is vested exclusively in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Amalgamated Ass'n of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees of America, Division 998 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Bakery Sales Drivers Local Union No. 33 v. WagshalSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Fred Wolferman, Inc. v. RootSupreme Court of Missouri · 1947
- Folsom Engraving Co. v. McNeilMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Katz Drug Co. v. KavnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
- Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. WeberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1954
- Adams Dairy, Inc. v. BurkeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
- National Labor Relations Board v. Katz Drug Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1953
- Baue v. Embalmers Federal Labor Union No. 21301Supreme Court of Missouri · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.