Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Local 142, an Unincorporated Association v. Libby, McNeill & Libby, a Corporation, 14098_1 (1955)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 14098_1 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 04, 1955
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 221 F.2d 225 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, Local 142, an Unincorporated Association, Appellant, v. LIBBY, McNEILL & LIBBY, a Corporation, Appellee. No. 14098. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. April 4, 1955. Bouslog & Symonds, Myer C. Symonds, Edward H. Nakamura, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellant. Blaisdell & Moore, Raymond M. Torkildson, James P. Blaisdell, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellee. Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and BONE and POPE, Circuit Judges. PER CURI
More

221 F.2d 225

INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, Local 142, an Unincorporated Association, Appellant,
v.
LIBBY, McNEILL & LIBBY, a Corporation, Appellee.

No. 14098.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 4, 1955.

Bouslog & Symonds, Myer C. Symonds, Edward H. Nakamura, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellant.

Blaisdell & Moore, Raymond M. Torkildson, James P. Blaisdell, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellee.

Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and BONE and POPE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Appellant seeks a reversal of a decision of the Hawaiian district court dismissing a complaint against appellee seeking a declaratory judgment that the appellee owes one of the employee members of the appellant his wages for a period in which he was allegedly wrongfully discharged, and for judgment for the amount owed. Appellant relies upon Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C.A. § 185 and the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.

2

The decision of this appeal was withheld awaiting the opinion of the Supreme Court in a similar case, Association of Westinghouse Salaried Employees v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 75 S. Ct. 488. The Supreme Court's decision of March 28, 1955 holds that a federal district court has no jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint on either of the statutes relied upon and cannot award the damages sought.

3

The judgment dismissing the complaint is affirmed.

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