BURKE v. LENIHAN

Nos. 76-3125, 76-3214.

606 F.2d 840 (1979)

C. William BURKE, John L. Connolly, Howard C. Dennis, Alexander Rados, William Schmidt, Jerald B. Laird, John C. Maxwell, Joseph H. Seymour, Richard L. Corbit, Harold Edwards, Donald E. Mier, William C. Waggoner, Richard Cannon and Alan Roberts, each in his respective capacity as Trustee of the Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Fund, John L. Connolly, C. V. Holder, Howard C. Dennis, John C. Maxwell, James J. Kirst, C. William Burke, Kenneth J. Bourguignon, Joseph H. Seymour, Richard L. Corbit, Harold Edwards, Donald E. Mier, William C. Waggoner, Richard Cannon and Jerry Trent, each in his respective capacity as Trustee of the Operating Engineers Pension Trust, Howard C. Dennis, C. William Burke, Alexander Rados, C. I. T. Johnson, James J. Kirst, Jerald B. Laird, Joseph H. Seymour, Richard L. Corbit, Harold Edwards, Donald E. Mier, William C. Waggoner and Richard Cannon, each in his respective capacity as Trustee of the Operating Engineers Vacation-Holiday Savings Trust, Alexander Rados, William Schmidt, Howard C. Dennis, Robert R. Moodie, C. I. T. Johnson, Charles J. Rounds, Jr., Joseph H. Seymour, Richard L. Corbit, Donald E. Mier, Jerry Trent, Alan Roberts and Harold Edwards, each in his respective capacity as Trustee of the Operating Engineers Journeyman and Apprentice Training Trust, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. James E. LENIHAN, an Individual, Defendant-Appellee. James E. LENIHAN, an Individual, Defendant-Cross-Appellant, v. C. William BURKE et al., Plaintiffs-Cross-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

August 2, 1979.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Julian G. Macias, Jr., Sacramento, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Donald H. Heller, Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before TRASK and HUG, Circuit Judges, and BOHANON, District Judge.


TRASK, Judge.

This case presents the same legal problem that was considered by a different panel of this court in the case of Waggoner v. C & D Pipeline Co., 601 F.2d 456 (9th Cir. 1979). In Waggoner the question on appeal was "whether the agreement requires contributions for all hours worked by employees who perform any covered work or only for the hours actually worked in covered employment." Waggoner v. C ...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases