H. FRANK MALONE, ACTING REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF THE ELEVENTH REGION OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, APPELLEE,
v.
UNITED STEEL WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the district court did not err in finding reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and in issuing an injunction.
The National Labor Relations Board investigated a secondary boycott charge against a union for picketing at a shipping pier. The Board found reasonabl…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonable Cause Standard For Injunctions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
A secondary boycott directed at Georgetown Steel Corporation was charged to United Steel Workers of America, AFL-CIO and investigated by the National Labor Relations Board. The complaint alleged that the union during August 1970 was picketing at the entrance to a public pier in Georgetown, South Carolina, from which the company’s steel is shipped, announcing that the corporation’s employees had struck.
The Board determined that it reasonably appeared that an unfair labor practice — a violation of section 8(b) (4) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 158(b) (4) — had been committed by the union in maintaining the picket line.
On August 29, 1970 the Federal District Court for South Carolina, on the petition of the Board, issued an injunction forbidding the maintenance of the picketing until the Board should finally adjudicate the dispute, section 10(i), 29 U.S.C. 160 (i). Without success, application was made by the union to the District Court and thereafter to the Chief Judge of this court to stay the injunction.. This appeal followed.
Critical to this controversy is the soundness of the Board’s finding that there was “reasonable cause to believe that such charge is true”. The issue for the courts’ decision is not the union’s guilt or innocence of a transgression of the Act. The inquiry is not so definitive. When the finding has been made by the District Court — as it was here — that “reasonable cause” is present, an injunction may be issued.
A review of the record is convincing that the evidence supports the trial judge’s finding. Certainly, it was not “clearly erroneous”, F.R.Civ.P. 52(a), nor was there abuse of discretion in granting the injunction.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sachs v. Local Union NO. 48, 454 F.2d 879 (4th Cir. 1972)
-
Squillacote v. Graphic Arts Int'l Union (Gaiu) Local 277, 513 F.2d 1017 (7th Cir. 1975)