Legal Opinion
R. O. Stenzel & Co. v. Department Store Package
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided June 20, 1951No. 6810PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REEVES, Chief Judge.
The defendants have severally filed motions to dismiss and the first named defendant, which may be designated as the Teamsters Union, has, in addition, filed a motion for a more definite statement, and to stay proceedings. The Teamsters Union is under a labor contract with the plaintiff, as appears from the pleadings, motions, and attached documents. The defendant, Wholesale Wine and Liquor Workers, Local Union No. 17, A. F. of L., is not connected with the plaintiff by any contractual arrangement. It is for that reason that the latter defendant has simply moved for a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sparks v. EnglandCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
- Clyde v. BroderickCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
- Guth v. Texas Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1946
3Cited by5 opinions
- Aacon Contracting Co. v. Ass'n of Catholic Trade UnionistsDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1959
- Square D Co. v. United Electrical, Radio & MacHine WorkersDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1954
- Texas Gas Transmission Corp. v. International Chemical Workers Local Union No. 187District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1962
- Rydberg v. Great Northern Ry. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1951
- Texas Gas Transmission Corp. v. International Chemical Workers Local Union No. 187District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1962