Legal Opinion

United States v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 16, 1998No. 88 Civ. 4486(DNE)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

EDELSTEIN, District Judge.

Background

This order emanates from the voluntary settlement of an action commenced by Plaintiff, United States of America, against Defendants, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“IBT” or “the Union”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board. This settlement was embodied in the voluntary consent Order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). Among other things, the Consent Decree provides for the creation of the Independent Review Board (“the IRB”). The IRB is responsible for investigating allegations of corruption within the Union. As part of its…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
  2. United States v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States of America, Charles M. Carberry v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Ron Carey & William HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
  2. United States v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
  3. United States v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API