Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

12990_1 (1960)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 12990_1 Visitors: 10
Filed: Apr. 29, 1960
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 277 F.2d 461 Bennet F. SCHAUFFLER, Regional Director of the Fourth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board. v. HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS & HELPERS, LOCAL 107, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, and Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Appellants. No. 12990. United States Court of Appeals Third Circ
More

277 F.2d 461

Bennet F. SCHAUFFLER, Regional Director of the Fourth Region
of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on
behalf of the National Labor Relations Board.
v.
HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS & HELPERS, LOCAL 107, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND
HELPERS OF AMERICA, and Warehouse Employees Union Local 169,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Appellants.

No. 12990.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued Feb. 16, 1960.
Decided April 29, 1960.

Richard H. Markowitz, Philadelphia, Pa. (Richard Kirschner, Wilderman & Markowitz, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellants.

Winthrop A. Johns, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Thomas J. McDermott, Associate General Counsel, Jacques Schurre, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for appellee.

Before BIGGS, Chief Judge and STALEY and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

We are informed by counsel that the National Labor Relations Board has decided that no violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D), 29 U.S.C.A. 158, has been committed and that a motion for reconsideration has been denied. No substantial issue remains for our determination and it is obvious that the preliminary injunction appealed from is no longer vialble.

2

Accordingly we will vacate the judgment of the court below and remand the case to the end that the appellants may make application to the court below for the discharge of the preliminary injunction. 182 F. Supp. 556.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer