BUSH

v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO.; NIX V. ILLINOIS; MCKINNON V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Bellmore v. Mobil OIL Corp., 783 F.2d 300 (2d Cir. 1986)
  …entional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege” test applicable to other constitutional rights. See Bush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 425 F. 2d 393, 396 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 833, 91 S.Ct. 64, 27 L.Ed.2d 64, reh’g denied, 400 U.S. 985, 91 S.Ct. 364, 27 L.Ed.2d 397 (1970) ; Moore, 340 U.S. at 621, 71 S.Ct. at 526. See also 9 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure § 2321 (1971) . The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may waive his right to jury tri…
• Mobil OIL Corp. v. OIL, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO, 504 F.2d 272 (5th Cir. 1974)
  …ess has always had the power to exempt seamen from the operation of state right to work laws. SeaPAK v. Industrial, Technical & Pro. Emp., Natl. Maritime Union, S.D.Ga.1969, 300 F. Supp. 1197, 1201, aff’d, 5th Cir. 1970, 423 F. 2d 1229, aff’d, 1971, 400 U.S. 985, 91 S.Ct. 452, 27 L.Ed.2d 434; Railway Employees’ Dept. v. Hanson, supra. But it has chosen not to do so. If we were to carve out an exception for seamen here, in the absence of any suggestion to do so from Congress, we would be encroaching on the…
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Atlanta Printing Specialties & Paper Prods. Union 527, AFL-CIO, 523 F.2d 783 (5th Cir. 1975)
  …iod of a year would better protect the union’s position from deterioration through revocation of checkoff authorizations.” SeaPak v. Industrial Employees N.M.U., 300 F.Supp. 1197, 1199 (S.D.Ga.1969), aff’d, 5 Cir., 1970, 423 F. 2d 1229, aff’d, 1971, 400 U.S. 985, 91 S.Ct. 452, 27 L.Ed.2d 434. But Felter makes it clear that Congress intended to preserve the employees’ freedom of choice to refrain from union membership. The reason for the annual escape period was to allow the employee to reconsider at least o…