Hattiesburg Building & Trades Council v. Broome

377 U.S. 126, 84 S. Ct. 1156, 12 L. Ed. 2d 172, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 2240, 56 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2063, 49 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 51,065
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 27, 1964·No. 669·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

After finding that the primary employer was not in commerce and ruling that the pre-emption rule of San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U. S. 236, was therefore not applicable, the state court enjoined picketing at the premises of the secondary employer. The judgment must be reversed. The jurisdictional standards established by the National Labor Relations Board (see 23 N. L. R. B. Ann. Rep. 8 (1958)) may be satisfied by reference to the business operations of either the primary or the secondary employer. Truck Drivers Local No. 649, 93 N. L. R. B. 386; Teamsters Local No. 554, 110 N. L. R. B. 1769; Madison Bldg. & Const. Trades Council, 134 N. L. R. B. 517. Here, as the record clearly *259 shows, the secondary employer’s operations met the jurisdictional requirements. Since the union’s activities in this case were arguably an unfair labor practice, Sailors’ Union of the Pacific, 92 N. L. R. B. 547, the state court had no jurisdiction to issue the injunction. San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U. S. 236; Construction Laborers v. Curry, 371 U. S. 542. Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hattiesburg Building & Trades Council v. Broome, 377 U.S. 126, 84 S. Ct. 1156, 12 L. Ed. 2d 172, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 2240, 56 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2063, 49 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 51,065 (1964).

377 U.S. 126 (Hattiesburg Building & Trades Council v. Broome) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Central Catholic Education Ass'n v. Archdiocese of Portland
916 P.2d 303 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1996)
Cunningham v. Dixon
700 F. Supp. 20 (S.D. Ohio, 1987)
American Radio Ass'n v. Mobile Steamship Ass'n
419 U.S. 215 (Supreme Court, 1974)
Musicians Union, Local No. 6 v. Superior Court
447 P.2d 313 (California Supreme Court, 1968)
Hattiesburg Building & Construction Trades Council v. Chain Electric Co.
209 So. 2d 924 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1968)
Broome v. Hattiesburg Building & Trades Council
206 So. 2d 184 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1967)
Stryjewski v. Local Union No. 830
233 A.2d 264 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1967)
Evangeline Downs, Inc. v. Pari-Mutuel Clerks' Union
191 So. 2d 358 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1966)
Armstrong Cork Co. v. Joiner
147 S.E.2d 317 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1966)
Russell v. Electrical Workers Local 569
409 P.2d 926 (California Supreme Court, 1966)
Mitcham v. Ark-La. Construction Co.
397 S.W.2d 789 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1965)
Pokigo v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
213 A.2d 689 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1965)
Prospect Dairy, Inc. v. Dellwood Dairy Co.
237 F. Supp. 176 (N.D. New York, 1964)
Blum v. International Ass'n of Machinists
201 A.2d 46 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1964)
Blum v. INTERNATIONAL ASS'N OF MACHINISTS, AFL-CIO.
201 A.2d 46 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1964)