Legal Opinion
Anderson v. AMBAC Industries, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 14, 1976PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. The union owes a duty to fairly represent all members of the collective bargaining unit (Vaca v Sipes, 386 US 171, 190; Ford Motor Co. v Huffman, 345 US 330; Tunstall v Brotherhood, 323 US 210), whether or not they are union members (Textile Workers v Lincoln Mills, 353 US 448). Even if one assumes that former employees who are not members of the collective bargaining unit are owed some duty by their former union, the complaint and the accompanying papers in this record fall short of demonstrating any bad faith or lack of representation by the union in relation to these…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Ford Motor Co. v. HuffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Tunstall v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & EnginemenSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
3Cited by4 opinions
- Anderson v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Jacobs v. Board of Education of East Meadow Union Free School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- National Labor Relations Board v. General Truck DriversCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
- Rigby v. CoughlinDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1990