Legal Opinion
Constar, Inc. v. Plumbers Local 447
District Court, E.D. California
Decided August 2, 1983No. CIV. S-81-807 LKKPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KARLTON, Chief Judge.
The developer of an office building and the general contractor on the project brought this suit against a local of the plumbers’ union. The plaintiffs allege that the defendant’s activities at the construction site constituted an illegal secondary boycott which damaged the plaintiffs. As I shall explain, the union cannot be held liable for those damages, for it did not act with the intent proscribed by the statute.
Ordinarily, judicial memoranda begin with a discussion of the facts, proceed to a review of the relevant law, and conclude with an application of law to…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. AikensSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Richards v. Nielsen Freight LinesDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1985
- Butchers' Union, Local No. 498 v. SDC Investment, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1986
- Constar, Inc., and David Butler Co. v. Plumbers Local 447Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Mautz & Oren, Inc. v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs, And Helpers Union, Local No. 279Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- Graham v. Bendix Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.