Legal Opinion
Clifton D. Mayhew, Inc. v. Pate
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 31, 1964No. 3478PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MYERS, Associate Judge.
Pate, a journeyman painter and member of Painters and Glaziers District Council No. 51 (hereinafter termed “union”), sustained an injury to his foot while working in Virginia for Mayhew, Inc., a painting contractor. Appellant and the union, as sole and exclusive bargaining agent for Pate, were parties to a collective bargaining agreement. One purpose of this agreement was “to promote the settlement of labor disagreements by conference and ar bitration.” The sections pertinent to the present case are:
Article IX
Sec. 1. The Contractor shall carry Workmen’s Compensation…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- 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
- United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers v. Lucas Flour Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Brandon v. HinesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- Davis v. Humphreys & Harding, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1964
- Overby v. BarnettDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1970
- Brandon v. HinesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981