1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 760 F.2d
  5. 760 F.2d 52 (1985)
 

STARKS v. PERLOFF BROS., INC.

No. 84-1288.

760 F.2d 52 (1985)

William STARKS, Solomon Scrivens, Thomas Sanders, Roy Washel, Elester Moore, Charles Lukomski, Charles Wehrle, George Nance, Leroy Evans, George Krumenacker, Frank Krumenacker, Harry Neiley, John O'Neill, Louis Cassidy, John Racek, John Walker, Milton Hurnton, Robert McClelland, Frank Hall, Joseph Wood, Elmore Leigh, John Beech, William Beech, Frederick Deal, Lonnie Leigh, Joseph Stuart, Leonard Phillips, Robert Cross, Gerard Senechal, Melvin Slaughter, David Stuart, Gene O'Mara, Carl McKnight, Michael Jaconski, Frank Brown, James Landi, Edmond Czerniak, Richard Gunning, Frank Pempkowki, Walter Wielgus, George Campbell, William Substalae, Thomas Amorates, Robert Mosely, Julius Krajewski, Robert Richardson, Mario Basile, George Levin, Emanuel Rosey, Paul Hillias, Gregory Anthony, Anthony Gilbert, William Fitzgerald, Henry Hicks, Robert Moses, Ronald Moore, Richard Gusovius, John Van Natta, John Del Raso, Robert Dilbeck, Appellants, v. PERLOFF BROTHERS, INC., Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, Truck Drivers and Helpers Union Local 676, Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided April 25, 1985.

Rehearing and Rehearing Denied May 24, 1985.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Oscar N. Gaskins (argued), Oscar N. Gaskins & Associates, P.C., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants.

Ann Miller (argued), Spector Cohen Gadon & Rosen, P.C., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee, Perloff Brothers, Inc.

Samuel L. Spear (argued), Bernard N. Katz, Meranze, Katz, Spear & Wilderman, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee, Local 169.

James Katz (argued), Tomar, Parks, Seliger, Simonoff & Adourian, Haddonfield, N.J., for appellee, Local Union No. 676.

Before SEITZ, GIBBONS, and SLOVITER, Circuit Judges.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 24, 1985.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SEITZ, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiffs brought this action in the district court against their erstwhile union, against their former employer, and against another union pursuant to §§ 301 and 303 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 185 & 187 (1982). The district court dismissed each of plaintiffs' claims for failure to state a claim upon which...

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