Legal Opinion

Dairy, Bakery & Food Workers Local Union No. 386 v. Grand Rapids Milk Division of National Dairy Products Corp.

District Court, W.D. Michigan

Decided February 20, 1958No. Civ. A. 3375PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KENT, District Judge.

Plaintiff filed its complaint under Section 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act, being 29 U.S.C.A. § 185, which provides:

“(a) Suits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization representing employees in an industry affecting commerce as defined in this chapter, or between any such labor organizations, may be brought in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the parties, without respect to^he amount in controversy or without regard to the citizenship of the parties.”

Plaintiff also relies upon the Arbitration Act, which is 9 U.S.C.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  4. Board of Comm'rs of Jackson Cty. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  5. Jerome v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mid-Century Insurance v. FishDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010
  2. Cotton v. MinterDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1979
  3. Leys v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2009
  4. Harshaw v. Bethany Christian ServicesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010
  5. Wolters v. FLAGSTAR BANK FSBUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010

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

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

Powered by the Exa API