Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
General Warehousemen & Helpers Local 767 v. Standard Brands, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided September 15, 1978No. Nos. 75-3797, 76-1579Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
TUTTLE, Circuit Judge,
with whom WISDOM, GOLDBERG, ALVIN B. RUBIN and VANCE, Circuit Judges, join, concurring in part and dissenting in part:
As an alternative course of action to that which I have recommended below, I concur in the majority’s remand of the arbitrator’s award for a reformulation in the form of lump sum damages. I respectfully dissent from its affirmance of the district court’s refusal to enforce the arbitrator’s award. I do not feel that the award conflicts with the NLRB certification of the IAM, or that it would require Standard to violate the terms of its agreement with the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- General Warehousemen and Helpers Local 767, Affiliated With International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America v. Standard Brands, Inc., General Warehousemen and Helpers, Local 767, Affiliated With International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Plaintiffs- Appellants- Cross v. Standard Brands, Inc., Defendant-Appellee-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977