Legal Opinion
Haupt v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided December 11, 1984No. Civ. 83-CV-2700-DTPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
COHN, District Judge.
This case is brought under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. §. 185. Plaintiff David M. Haupt (Haupt) claims his employer, Michigan Bell Telephone Company (Bell), breached the collective bargaining agreement governing his employment in discharging him and that his union, The Communication Workers of America (the Union), breached its duty of fair representation in the handling of several of his grievanees. The Union and Bell filed motions for summary judgment; a hearing was held on January 23, 1984. Supplemental briefs…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- William Ruzicka, and Cross-Appellee v. General Motors Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
- Farmer v. Ara Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Ruzicka v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lucas v. Leaseway Multi Transportation Service, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1990
- Grant v. ARA Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1985
- Sargent v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, & Helpers of America, Food & Beverage Drivers, WarehousemenDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1989
- Dragomier v. Local 1112 International Union United Automobile Aerospace & Agricultural Implement WorkersDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2014
- Smith v. Drug, Chemical, Cosmetic, Plastics & Affiliated Industries Warehouse Employees Local 815District Court, E.D. New York · 1996
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.