United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation

Supreme Court

United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation

359 U.S. 905, 79 S. Ct. 580, 3 L. Ed. 2d 570, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 1828

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedFebruary 24, 1959

Docket562. 563

StatusPublished

This text of 359 U.S. 905 (United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation, 359 U.S. 905, 79 S. Ct. 580, 3 L. Ed. 2d 570, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 1828 (1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Petition for writ of. certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted; and

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. granted limited to question - 1 presented by the petition for the writ which reads as follows:

. “1. Where (1) the settlement of disputes section of collective bargaining agreements - antedating 1950 provided that Mine Workers shall not engage in a work stoppage pending settlement of disputes under grievance machinery procedures and such agreements contained other ‘no strike’ clauses, and (2) under the Labor Man-agément Relations Act, 1947, 4a 'the right to strike became-a bargainable subject, and (3) in 1950 UMW and coal operators signatories to. the National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreement of 1950, deleted such clauses therefrom .and expressly covenanted that the ‘no strike’ clauses in prior agreements were rescinded and made null and void, and (4) signatories to such 1950 Agreément covenanted that stoppages, as well as disputes, shall be settled exclusively under grievance machinery procedures set forth in ■such contract, is a stoppage of work pending settlement of a dispute cognizable under the grievance machinery *906 procedures proscribed thereby and a violation of the 1950 Agreement so as to subject UMW and District. 28 to damage actions under the Act’s Section 301?”

Val J. Mitch, Harold H. Bacon, E. H. Rayson, Charles E. McNabb and R. R. Kramer for petitioners in No. 562. Welly K. Hopkins, Harrison Combs, Willard P. Owens and M. E. Boiarsky for petitioners in No. 563. Fred B. Greear for respondent. Mr. Justice Stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.

Reported below: 259 E. 2d 346.

4a

The Labor Management Relations Act,. 1947, is herein called the “Act.”

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

Petition for writ of. certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted; and

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. granted limited to question - 1 presented by the petition for the writ which reads as follows:

. “1. Where (1) the settlement of disputes section of collective bargaining agreements - antedating 1950 provided that Mine Workers shall not engage in a work stoppage pending settlement of disputes under grievance machinery procedures and such agreements contained other ‘no strike’ clauses, and (2) under the Labor Man-agément Relations Act, 1947, 4a 'the right to strike became-a bargainable subject, and (3) in 1950 UMW and coal operators signatories to. the National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreement of 1950, deleted such clauses therefrom .and expressly covenanted that the ‘no strike’ clauses in prior agreements were rescinded and made null and void, and (4) signatories to such 1950 Agreément covenanted that stoppages, as well as disputes, shall be settled exclusively under grievance machinery procedures set forth in ■such contract, is a stoppage of work pending settlement of a dispute cognizable under the grievance machinery *906 procedures proscribed thereby and a violation of the 1950 Agreement so as to subject UMW and District. 28 to damage actions under the Act’s Section 301?”

Val J. Mitch, Harold H. Bacon, E. H. Rayson, Charles E. McNabb and R. R. Kramer for petitioners in No. 562. Welly K. Hopkins, Harrison Combs, Willard P. Owens and M. E. Boiarsky for petitioners in No. 563. Fred B. Greear for respondent. Mr. Justice Stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.

Reported below: 259 E. 2d 346.

4a

The Labor Management Relations Act,. 1947, is herein called the “Act.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 U.S. 905, 79 S. Ct. 580, 3 L. Ed. 2d 570, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 1828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-mine-workers-of-america-v-benedict-coal-corporation-scotus-1959.